If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AL.com)   Alabama public school separates boys and girls for all classes "because boys are better than girls because their bodies receive testosterone, while girls have similar skills only a few days per month". The ACLU has a problem with this   (blog.al.com) divider line 100
    More: Asinine, Birmingham's Huffman Middle School, ACLU, Alabama, Office of Civil Rights, gender stereotypes, U.S. Department of Education  
•       •       •

16148 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Dec 2012 at 3:45 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-10 04:14:34 AM  
10 votes:
The older I get, the more absolutely stupid humanity seems to become.

I grew up in the 50's and got used to Stupid, but by the 60's, changes were taking place that would be profound and for the overall good. Now we exist in a world of electronic miracles, which has shrunk the world dramatically, opened up borders, crossed the barriers of tradition, language, religion and society, exposed people to the thoughts of millions and brought vast amounts of education to your home, for free, at the click of a mouse.

I've seen 'liberation' in many forms and freedoms flourish like never before. I've watched traditions fall and civilizations begin to blend as free thinkers began to be heard.

However, as always, there seems to be an undercurrent of Stupid, which threatens to suck civilization back down into the Dark Ages and some people cling to archaic ideas and hire lawyers more than willing to take their money and tie up the courts in an effort to suppress the rights of others and make a joke of the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Maybe pushing so much electronic advances on people was done before the species had matured enough to grasp them. The Internet and cell phones have given rise to new, expansive outlets for the Lunatic Fringe and hate groups, people who spew hate over things they don't understand and others who spread misinformation mainly because they can.

Stupid seems to thrive in the Southern States of the USA, where many folks are still fighting the civil war and cling to old traditions and philosophies.

Whoever is responsible for reinstating a segregational system that was forcibly ended by law at the end of the 18th century needs to have his or her collective arses kicked and loose their positions of power and influence.

Humanity never fails to disappoint me.
2012-12-10 08:15:02 AM  
6 votes:
imgs.xkcd.com

Applies to anything, really (driving, sports, games, etc). Society tends to judge men's failures on an individual basis, but tends to judge an individual woman's failure as indicative of her entire gender (and an individual woman's success as an outlier).
2012-12-10 02:33:55 AM  
6 votes:
How about we stop sending foreign aid to third-world developing countries and send it to farking Alabama?
2012-12-10 07:34:44 AM  
5 votes:

HindiDiscoMonster: /Assuming science is correct in this matter


Yes and no. Science largely debunked the "left-half/right-half-dominant" theories nearly a century ago.

So it really depends on what century you're still living in with regards to science.
2012-12-10 03:55:35 AM  
5 votes:
I was gonna try to say something smart or funny, but screw it. Fark everyone involved with making this happen. THIS is states rights in action, folks, and boy howdy, ain't they some clever sumbiatches? 

Idiots! Goddamn idiots are in charge! What the actual fark is wrong with us?
2012-12-10 01:18:34 AM  
5 votes:

Apos: Mind-boggling idiocy. Alabama is clearly vying for a Fark tag.


Jake. It's Alabama. You can't do anything about it.

/Spent a lot of my life on the AL/TN/MS border. Jesus Christ, the stupidity.
//Jesus Christ seemed to have a lot to do with their stupidity, actually
2012-12-10 09:11:32 AM  
4 votes:

MycroftHolmes: So, segregating classes may be counterproductive, but is it not valid to recognize that women and men have different wiring, both physiologically as well as cognitively? I know it is not politically correct to acknowledge things that should be patently obvious but inconvenient, but is anyone denying the fact that the male and female brains process things differently, and have different fundamental wiring?


It's not valid to claim scientific, measurable phenomena as "patently obvious" when you haven't provided any support for such. For example, if we placed a brain from a corpse on a table, could you tell at a look whether it came from a male or female corpse? No. In fact, is there any test you could use other than a DNA test that would tell you if it came from a male or female corpse? Nope.

And furthermore, are there statistical cognitive differences between adult men and women on average, when a population is considered as a whole? Yes. This doesn't mean that you can make any claims about an individual, since the plots overlap significantly:
static.thesocietypages.org
It also doesn't mean that those differences are "fundamental" and due to "different wiring", since you haven't eliminated environmental and social factors.

In short, your "science" is non-existent and all of your claims are based on tenuous statistical connections made in reverse from a conclusion you already held, without evidence.
2012-12-10 04:59:04 AM  
4 votes:
Everybody knows the true rugged, testosterone-filled manly men are to be found in the Mathematics Departments of universities.

*sigh* And this on Ada Lovelace's birthday.
2012-12-10 04:35:03 AM  
4 votes:
It doesn't make a lot of sense. If this program is so great, you might as well test kids for their testosterone levels so they're in the right group. Testosterone levels vary wildly between individuals. I'm an XY male with idiopathic secondary hypogonadism (basically a pituitary issue causes me to have low testosterone and they don't know why) and I have similar testosterone levels to an XX friend of mine who has PCOS. I went through two years of calculus in high school (I forget what they called it, AB, BC, soemthing like that), and did fine with testosterone levels that I assume were low back then as well.

But to throw all boys together and all girls together is a bit crude scientifically (if there really was any science to begin with).

I can also tell you the gay kids will suffer. It will be hell. The same way that they say there are less distractions, being with only the same gender becomes this torturous world where you observe what you like but can't do anything about while having to try to act like a normal person to not get found out. In short, gay guys need straight girls. Especially in Alabama.
2012-12-10 01:03:43 AM  
4 votes:
Having separate sex education classes by gender really doesn't sound like a problem. I'm pretty sure mine were. But then you get the section Subby quoted:

According to the complaint filed by the ACLU, instructions for teaching boys call for stressing heroic behavior that shows what it means to "be a man." According to the ACLU, the school relied on a book that teaches that boys are better than girls in math because their bodies receive daily surges of testosterone, while girls have similar skills only a few days per month when they experience increased estrogen during the menstrual cycle.

and I'm all with the ACLU here. What a crock of shiat.
2012-12-10 01:00:54 AM  
4 votes:

Apos: Mind-boggling idiocy. Alabama is clearly vying for a Fark tag.


That argument is bizarre. I went through 12 years of Catholic, the first eight years mixed gender, the last four segregated. The rationale? Mixed gender would be too distracting for high schoolers (which has a certain validity). But not because boys were smarter.
2012-12-10 12:59:09 AM  
4 votes:
As long as the classes are equal it's OK if they're separated.
2012-12-10 09:43:42 AM  
3 votes:
What's important to Alabamaians/The South: -not in any particular order-

1)God

2)Football - sports in general

3)Nascar

4)Booze

5) cliques (being in the 'right' social circles)

6) Race - the blacks are just as prejudiced as the whites

7)Republican party -- the majority (~60%) of Alabamaians (and the south) are Republican and poor. they don't even know who in D.C. is against their interests. they vote for their enemy in washington.


What is not important to Alabamaians/The South:

1) the ability to reason. the ability to take information/facts and make reasonable conclusions/judgments about them without using 'God' as a source.

2)Taxes -they're evil and ruining freedom. even though the South gets more Federal Money than any other section of the United States. ironic to say the least.
2012-12-10 04:44:40 AM  
3 votes:

swingerofbirches: It doesn't make a lot of sense. If this program is so great, you might as well test kids for their testosterone levels so they're in the right group. Testosterone levels vary wildly between individuals. I'm an XY male with idiopathic secondary hypogonadism (basically a pituitary issue causes me to have low testosterone and they don't know why) and I have similar testosterone levels to an XX friend of mine who has PCOS. I went through two years of calculus in high school (I forget what they called it, AB, BC, soemthing like that), and did fine with testosterone levels that I assume were low back then as well.

But to throw all boys together and all girls together is a bit crude scientifically (if there really was any science to begin with).

I can also tell you the gay kids will suffer. It will be hell. The same way that they say there are less distractions, being with only the same gender becomes this torturous world where you observe what you like but can't do anything about while having to try to act like a normal person to not get found out. In short, gay guys need straight girls. Especially in Alabama.


I think something that many people overlook with these kinds of correlations is that elevated testosterone does not mean a whole lot at the end of the day... the brain only has a certain number testosterone receptors in the brain. Produce more than the receptors can handle, then nothing happens... At the end of the day, the author that wrote this book probably has a very limited understanding of the endocrine system and how it works in the body. What is even worse, is that the educators have even less of an understanding of it than he does...  The end result is an ACLU lawsuit against the school.
2012-12-10 04:42:20 AM  
3 votes:

ghostwind: Somacandra: FTFA: According to the ACLU, the school relied on a book that teaches that boys are better than girls in math because their bodies receive daily surges of testosterone, while girls have similar skills only a few days per month when they experience increased estrogen during the menstrual cycle.

Downloaded and read the PDF complaint. Seems to center around this book:

[i.imgur.com image 350x523] 

Does a lot of "gender science." Not sure what that is supposed to mean, except it heavily privileged nature over nurture

From what I read on his website, this guy is basically a teacher who went and did "post-graduate" work in Educational psychology, and now claims to be a neuro-psychological specialist... Even so, educational psychologist ≠ neuro-psychologist, nor anything close to it. It is this kind of garbage science that they teach you isn't true in your first year of psychology...


Phrases like "neuro-psychological specialist" are words that are made up by shady "counselors" to make it sound as if they have more expertise than they really do while avoiding legal troubles by calling themselves psychologists. Basically, this guy has written a bunch of books for consumption by the general population, and as far as I can tell, doesn't have a single peer-reviewed article published in any psychology journals. What this all boils down to is that he very likely doesn't have a single damn shred of evidence to support many of his unique assertions, but plenty of foolish people will buy these books, read them, and swear by them. And when one of those people is an educator, that's when you get weak rationales for things like gender-separated classes.
2012-12-10 12:55:30 AM  
3 votes:
Mind-boggling idiocy. Alabama is clearly vying for a Fark tag.
2012-12-10 09:29:28 AM  
2 votes:

MycroftHolmes: Looking at the differences critically and determining if we are looking at something substantive is much more constructive than 'Stupid rednecks doing stupid segregation'.


If that were what the stupid rednecks actually were doing here, I'd agree. Then again many of us have been over this point.

The notion that everyone can be taught in exactly the same way and all involved receiving equal benefit from it I don't really believe is up for debate. We know that's not the case.

We also know that the conceit that we can do this isn't really grounded in science so much as it's grounded in the needs of society. We select a method of education that is "mostly" beneficial for the majority of people subject to it as a matter of efficiency. We understand there will be outliers, of course. The Special Education system was conceived to catch the secondary and tertiary cases before they fall through the cracks.

And even that is far from an ideal system- which I can tell you from a lot of personal experience.


The mistake here isn't in acknowledging that some students learn differently. We already know they do. The mistake is assuming they learn differently, and in oddly specific ways, and then ascribing these differences to a suspect (and largely superficial) factor- in this case: gender.
2012-12-10 08:34:13 AM  
2 votes:
Farking General Sherman and his half measures.

Seriously, if we don't figure out how to fix the Southern Problem soon, it will be the death of this country.
2012-12-10 07:16:17 AM  
2 votes:
Women who vote Republican:

This is the world the Republicans want for you and your daughters.
2012-12-10 06:57:09 AM  
2 votes:

Big Ramifications: Metalithic: IIRC the book cites the absurdly lopsided ratio of male:female mathematics doctorates as proof.

So what exactly are you saying? That a predominance of male mathematics postgraduates is proof that testosterone makes you a math wiz?
~
~
Firstly, I'm asking why there is a difference. Not saying why there is a difference [albeit in a smartass way - try not to get too butt hurt].

Secondly, if you read between the lines, clearly I'm asking: "OK, so it's not testosterone. Great. I'm happy for youse all. So why is there a difference? Coz there clearly is a difference by the time you get to leet university level mathematicians.

Got any ideas, chuckles?


Maybe it has to do with the gender stereotyping illustrated in this article? "We think girls are bad at math, so let's just not teach it to them and let them bake cookies instead."

And it's not just schooling. This gender stereotyping is ingrained in pretty much every aspect of our lives, from our toys to our entertainment. You have building blocks, and "building blocks for girls", which are pink and come mostly pre-assembled. The toy aisles are segregated by gender, so kids don't even really get the opportunity to browse what the other gender is "supposed" to play with.

And before you say that toy companies are just catering to what the genders would naturally gravitate towards playing with, anyway, I offer you this: Soccer vs. Football. In pretty much every country besides the US, soccer is the dominant sport, whereas in the US, it's football. Is there some ingrained hormonal response unique to Americans that makes Americans naturally prefer football over soccer? No, it's completely cultural. If an American grew up in a European country, they'd probably like soccer instead. I propose that the intellectual interests of the genders probably operates in a similar manner.
2012-12-10 06:34:42 AM  
2 votes:
I don't know which is worse. Alabama, or the bastards in the comments section attacking the article writer.
2012-12-10 05:55:21 AM  
2 votes:

Metalithic: Big Ramifications: Metalithic: IIRC the book cites the absurdly lopsided ratio of male:female mathematics doctorates as proof.

So what exactly are you saying? That a predominance of male mathematics postgraduates is proof that testosterone makes you a math wiz?
~
~
Firstly, I'm asking why there is a difference. Not saying why there is a difference [albeit in a smartass way - try not to get too butt hurt].

Secondly, if you read between the lines, clearly I'm asking: "OK, so it's not testosterone. Great. I'm happy for youse all. So why is there a difference? Coz there clearly is a difference by the time you get to leet university level mathematicians.

Got any ideas, chuckles?

Well, there do appear to be some differences in brain organization and structure between males and females. Hormones have been mentioned in scientific articles as a possible factor (I did a search on Google Scholar and found some papers in reputable journals, but I just had time to glance at the abstracts), so I guess the testosterone theory may be a bizarre misinterpretation of actual research. However it seems that many factors are involved, and I imagine that our cultural attitudes toward math and gender have some effect.


My guess is that the brain needs a certain amount of testosterone or estrogen (among other hormones) to operate at peak efficiency. How much it needs is probably not very much, more than is produced by anyone without a serious glandular condition. Then Captain Derpy here reads that bit about "the brain requires testosterone or estrogen", doesn't bother to check his units, and winds up publishing a book full of crap.
2012-12-10 05:33:14 AM  
2 votes:
I was born missing a fully functional endocrine system, which was really noticed until puberty. I produce minimal amounts of testosterone and pretty much nothing else. Math in all its form was a struggle for me throughout school, but now I do math in my head. This makes me living proof that the introduction of synthetic female hormones creates mathematicians. Makes as much damn sense as this guys ideas.

I know it's not PC to test children and then track them either towards college or vo-tech, but it's a hell of lot better than this idea.
2012-12-10 04:42:23 AM  
2 votes:

ByOwlLight: giftedmadness: and the quote from the headline is never found in the article

Know how I know you didn't read the article?


Don't mind him, he also said Feminism is a mental disorder.

/though I have to admire the amount of stupidity he manages to cram into a such a short post
2012-12-10 04:23:46 AM  
2 votes:

giftedmadness: and the quote from the headline is never found in the article


Know how I know you didn't read the article?
2012-12-10 04:21:36 AM  
2 votes:

Somacandra: FTFA: According to the ACLU, the school relied on a book that teaches that boys are better than girls in math because their bodies receive daily surges of testosterone, while girls have similar skills only a few days per month when they experience increased estrogen during the menstrual cycle.

Downloaded and read the PDF complaint. Seems to center around this book:

[i.imgur.com image 350x523] 

Does a lot of "gender science." Not sure what that is supposed to mean, except it heavily privileged nature over nurture


From what I read on his website, this guy is basically a teacher who went and did "post-graduate" work in Educational psychology, and now claims to be a neuro-psychological specialist... Even so, educational psychologist ≠ neuro-psychologist, nor anything close to it. It is this kind of garbage science that they teach you isn't true in your first year of psychology...
2012-12-10 04:05:53 AM  
2 votes:
Wasn't this a simpsons episode :/ ? Does the school board learn nothing from Fox animation domination?
2012-12-10 03:55:55 AM  
2 votes:
holy crap. I thought subby was making that up. My apologies, good sir/madam. You were, indeed, quoting from TFA.

I can't believe parents are allowing this. If every parent took their child out of the school, or at least threatened to, perhaps the school would smarten up.

/don't really believe that, but I live in hope.
2012-12-10 01:55:14 AM  
2 votes:
FTFA: According to the ACLU, the school relied on a book that teaches that boys are better than girls in math because their bodies receive daily surges of testosterone, while girls have similar skills only a few days per month when they experience increased estrogen during the menstrual cycle.

Downloaded and read the PDF complaint. Seems to center around this book:

i.imgur.com 

Does a lot of "gender science." Not sure what that is supposed to mean, except it heavily priveldges nature over nurt
2012-12-10 01:42:35 AM  
2 votes:

BronyMedic: Apos: Mind-boggling idiocy. Alabama is clearly vying for a Fark tag.

Jake. It's Alabama. You can't do anything about it.

/Spent a lot of my life on the AL/TN/MS border. Jesus Christ, the stupidity.
//Jesus Christ seemed to have a lot to do with their stupidity, actually


Huntsville is the sole bastion of sanity, and even it's fading as of late. Too many old people retiring from the Arsenal and deciding in their spare time they need to get involved in everyone else's lives.
2012-12-10 01:12:32 AM  
2 votes:

doglover: Here is a stereotype I know about one of the parties in this headline with no other context

 

t0.gstatic.com
2012-12-10 01:08:10 AM  
2 votes:
It makes sense for drivers' ed.
2012-12-10 07:53:42 PM  
1 votes:

SkunkWerks: omeganuepsilon: It's a viscous cycle, and we can't do anything about it if we don't identify it.

So, we've never identified this before... ever?

Forgive me for re-iterating things I've already said, but I rather thought this was the point of my "pedantry" on the nature of "shocking allegories regarding ideological hypocrisy" and how they're really a lot more common, and a whole hell of a lot less shocking than you'd think they are.

Moreover, they aren't shocking for the reasons you're suggesting they are.

omeganuepsilon: Being pedantic over "shocking" "paradox" whever. You do find it interesting, as do we, so really, stop being confrontational about how people describe their interest.

If re-treading "shock" recursively and feigning empirical interest by mis-attributing such "alarming" phenomenon so such overly-simplified criteria as "political worldview" is your preferred way of experiencing the world, don't let me stop you (indeed, I can't). By all means. Continue.

shortymac: I'd argue that while officially Norway adopted a more feminist outlook, you don't know what parents are teaching their kids behind closed doors. Their parents and grandparents grew up in pre-feminist times and a lot of cultural stereotyping still lingers under the surface.

Lois Frankel's work shows that while parents encourage children of both sexes to work and study hard, parents unconsciously encourage their sons into "riskier" careers like CEO and stock broker while encouraging their daughters into "safe" careers like nurse and teaching.

Hell, my own parents encouraged me at a young age to be a teacher so "I could have summers off to raise my future kids." They did not do this any of my brothers, despite being very feminist while raising me.

Oh hey, someone gets it. Hi there.

Been saying this for a while. "ZOMG Norway! It has turned liberal! Yet it still ascribes to centuries worth of social conditioning! Le shock and horror!"


You keep blathering on with your righteous bullshiat, but have yet to address the point....the implied paradox, is that a society that was largely already ahead of more conservative societies has gone BACK to being less egalitarian in the workplace, DESPITE years of programs and decades of less conservative policies.

So, how do you propose that gender stereotypes INCREASED in a time period when there were no official policies helping that increase along, and when parenting was, as far as anyone knows, at least as liberal as it was in the past? How do the remnants of older stereotypes resurface on such a large scale with nobody really enforcing them, to the point where more conservative societies have more equal outcomes?

Your "explanation" explains nothing, but relies on guesses about the existence of stereotypes that don't seem to apply to the situation in question....personally, I think you're engaging in the very same behavior that you and Theatus were criticizing earlier in the thread. If it doesn't fit your preconceived victim-religion worldview, it can't be real...so you get to make up pat explanations rather than address the facts at hand....of course, nobody else gets to do that.

/it's pretty transparent, really.
2012-12-10 03:31:09 PM  
1 votes:

BooCollins: Statistics show that academics in both boys and girls are much improved if separated


imgs.xkcd.com
2012-12-10 01:40:04 PM  
1 votes:
There's a situation that's common with just about any major social/political change, where the first generation is heavily invested in something while later generations take it for granted. For example, people in a newly democratic country will go to almost any lengths to vote, sometimes at the risk of their lives, while people in a long-standing democracy won't bother to vote if they find it even slightly inconvenient. In this recent election, people in my area were complaining that the lines at the polls were nearly half an hour long; in Sudan, people lined up patiently not just for minutes or hours but days to vote.

So on one hand you have the social forces encouraging girls to go into tech fields; on the other, you have social forces discouraging them. In the initial stages of Norway's drive for equality, the former were considerably more powerful. The people involved felt that they were doing something important, like the people lined up for hours or days to vote. As time went on, future generations didn't feel that same pressure to be trailblazers. Yeah, equality exists, so what I do isn't important. So, while the forces discouraging girls from entering tech fields were becoming weaker, the forces encouraging them to do so became weaker still. Hence the reduction in numbers.

It's the difference between "It's important so I need to do it" and "other people are already doing it; I don't have to." That initial spike can really skew the results.
2012-12-10 11:26:06 AM  
1 votes:

ghostwind: MycroftHolmes: HotWingConspiracy: MycroftHolmes: HindiDiscoMonster: MycroftHolmes:

A 30 second GIS yielded the following articles that suggest a link between testosterone and greater learning capabilities (although some of this is more relevant to people with testosterone deficiencies)

Two of three articles that you provided looked at the effects of testosterone in hypogonadal men, and one of the articles dealt with an animal model. While using patients for studies like this can be informing, there is no clear cut case that you would see any benefits in normal healthy humans. As I mentioned in an earlier post, there are a limited number of androgen (testosterone) receptors in the brain, and once these are all in use, you will not see any more effect. However, when you have men who do not produce enough testosterone, raising the levels of the hormone is likely to have some positive effect.

A similar thing can be said for animal models. While rats do have a similar brain to humans, it is not the same. Animal modeling is never meant to be a definitive replacement for human research, but rather as a guide post for future research that could be done in humans. A way point of sorts.


A very good point.

It's the same sort of thing that leads to reporters saying "X substance causes cancer in mice, therefore it must be a human carcinogen." The popular assumption is that a bunch of healthy mice were fed normal doses of the substance in question, and more of them developed cancer. Actually, that's not the case; all else aside, maintaining an animal colony large enough to see statistically significant effects from a test like that would be prohibitively expensive. Instead, if they want to test if X causes, say, liver cancer, they start with a strain of mice prone to developing liver tumors (maybe one of the arf-null variants), feed a bunch of them massive doses of the substance in question, and see if they develop more liver tumors than a control group. The problem with this is that they've done the equivalent of feeding a group of diabetics plates full of sugar cookies. The data generated is true for that specific genetically susceptible population, and might or might not be applicable to a genetically normal population. There's no way to tell from that data alone.

Same thing here: The effects of testosterone on people who are in some way not part of the normal population (hypogonadal men, in this case) may have nothing whatsoever to do with that normal population, any more than the fact that some people could die from eating a peanut means that peanuts are a toxin to everyone. It may open an avenue of research, and point to something worth investigating, but it doesn't "prove" anything. The "X causes cancer! Doom! Gloom!" stories make me want to slap the fool writing them.
2012-12-10 10:40:52 AM  
1 votes:

SkunkWerks: ChuDogg: The paradox is that liberal societies have more pronounced gender stereotypes than conservative ones.

And, as I said, those societies are still hanging on to those stereotypes despite having become "liberal", hence it's not really much of a paradox, or a shock, for that matter.


Because you see it in both parties, does not mean it's apparent to all. When pointed out and demonstrated to that supposed "liberal" or liberal society it can indeed be a shock.
If we don't discuss things of that nature, people will never learn, so attempting to write it off as "*yawn* not a surprise" sort of sounds like you're attempting to be willfully ignorant, or at least support those that are ignorant, willful or not.

What Chu said is maybe not true in the sense that it's more pronounced, but the lgbt community still largely ascribes heavily to masculine and feminine, instead of just letting people do whatever, completely without a label or getting more accurate(IE kids that play with trucks or lego's aren't masculine, but more mechanically minded than those that play with dolls).

They've become conservative of their new culture in that way.
2012-12-10 10:28:25 AM  
1 votes:

MycroftHolmes: So, segregating classes may be counterproductive, but is it not valid to recognize that women and men have different wiring, both physiologically as well as cognitively? I know it is not politically correct to acknowledge things that should be patently obvious but inconvenient, but is anyone denying the fact that the male and female brains process things differently, and have different fundamental wiring?


Yes. Just about every anthropologist I have known would vehemently deny that such a basic wiring exists. There is no actual basis for believing that this scenario has been true long enough to have impacted human evolution in such strong terms.

There is every evidence that the conclusion comes from trying to fallaciously describe cultural conditioning through a physical means. This whole matter is begging the question.

Of course you find psychologists and education types arguing that it is based in deep human prehistory. But the people who study that area specifically have found no evidence of it, and moreover brain imaging scans performed by bioanthro types looking at this problem have found no correlation between hemispheric dominance and aptitude at learning math and science.

All of the objective, evidence-based science refutes the concept. Those who push it do so because it makes sense to them and they can find older studies that explain what you describe. If they read the journals that the researchers publish in, they reject the newer findings as "pc thinking" and believe that the older data are settled despite being based on only indirect observation.

This has as little validity as The Bell Curve's argument for hereditary intelligence. Any natural variation is minimal and it is the environment that informs achievement.
2012-12-10 10:25:45 AM  
1 votes:

Rik01: The older I get, the more absolutely stupid humanity seems to become.

I grew up in the 50's and got used to Stupid, but by the 60's, changes were taking place that would be profound and for the overall good. Now we exist in a world of electronic miracles, which has shrunk the world dramatically, opened up borders, crossed the barriers of tradition, language, religion and society, exposed people to the thoughts of millions and brought vast amounts of education to your home, for free, at the click of a mouse.

I've seen 'liberation' in many forms and freedoms flourish like never before. I've watched traditions fall and civilizations begin to blend as free thinkers began to be heard.

However, as always, there seems to be an undercurrent of Stupid, which threatens to suck civilization back down into the Dark Ages and some people cling to archaic ideas and hire lawyers more than willing to take their money and tie up the courts in an effort to suppress the rights of others and make a joke of the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Maybe pushing so much electronic advances on people was done before the species had matured enough to grasp them. The Internet and cell phones have given rise to new, expansive outlets for the Lunatic Fringe and hate groups, people who spew hate over things they don't understand and others who spread misinformation mainly because they can.

Stupid seems to thrive in the Southern States of the USA, where many folks are still fighting the civil war and cling to old traditions and philosophies.

Whoever is responsible for reinstating a segregational system that was forcibly ended by law at the end of the 18th century needs to have his or her collective arses kicked and loose their positions of power and influence.

Humanity never fails to disappoint me.


yep.

The more some people pull ahead, the more some willingly pull themselves further behind. It amazes me. There are people who still think that computers are bad, in the complete absence of any actual logic. They say this while having a smartphone, driving a car, using a telephone, etc.
2012-12-10 10:21:12 AM  
1 votes:
My understanding was that sex differences in mathematical ability at school had been proven to be caused by the expectations of teachers, and that this had now changed to the point where girls these days typically outperform boys in maths at school level.

THIS has been used for an argument for segregating the sexes in maths classes - it is something to do with the boys being distracted, as far as I recall.
2012-12-10 10:06:15 AM  
1 votes:

Arthur Jumbles:
The key point was there was a difference.... the researchers put there own interpretation upon the results, which I don't agree with, but the difference remained. Whether this was because of color, shape or smell it does prove that there were innate differences in preference by gender and the subjects weren't blank slates.


So we should base educational policy on slight behavioral differences found on a study of 34 rhesus monkeys?
2012-12-10 10:03:50 AM  
1 votes:

HotWingConspiracy: I like that the comments section seems convinced that the ACLU is the federal government.

Alabama!


Alabama being taken over by either one would be a huge improvement.
2012-12-10 10:00:52 AM  
1 votes:

Benevolent Misanthrope: Not only the math thing - the boys also get daily exercise while the girls are kept quiet. How the fark does anyone get the idea that girls don't need exercise?!

I mean, that's stupid even for Alabama.



the only exercise a girl is supposed to get is hobbing up and down on her husband's schlong.
2012-12-10 10:00:17 AM  
1 votes:

Theaetetus: Arthur Jumbles: Theaetetus: Arthur Jumbles: Actually, that's not true. It's been found that toy preference is innately different between boys and girls. They tested this with monkey so as to avoid human cultural preferences and still found that the male baby monkeys preferred active toys while the girl monkeys liked dolls.

... except that the "active toys" and "dolls" had other variable differences. For example, the active toys had bright colors while the dolls had muted colors. Why isn't the conclusion that male monkeys have dimmer color vision? Furthermore, if you read the study, you find that the statement "the girl monkeys liked dolls" is false - the study actually found that girl monkeys preferred both toys equally, while the boy monkeys showed a slight preference for the brightly colored toy.

And finally, the study didn't avoid human cultural preferences at all - the toys were specifically chosen to be a "boy's toy" and a "girl's toy", and so the study was really testing how well monkeys conform to human stereotypes. And as the data showed, girl monkeys didn't conform - or, rather, no one likes passive bland toys that much.

The key point was there was a difference.... the researchers put there own interpretation upon the results, which I don't agree with, but the difference remained. Whether this was because of color, shape or smell it does prove that there were innate differences in preference by gender and the subjects weren't blank slates.

Uh, yes? Hooray? See above - this is straw feminism. No one claims there is no difference, so having a study that only proves conclusively that there's a difference is not contradicting any existing claims, nor does it support any other conclusion.


Specifically, your conclusions above - "innate difference in toy preference" and "male baby monkeys preferred active toys while the girl monkeys liked dolls" - are unsupported. All the study showed was "male baby monkeys have a preference for a bright red object with spinnable bright blue wheels over a plush brown object with no moving parts" and "girl baby monkeys had no particular preference between the objects".
Trying to extend that to "active toys", "dolls", or even "toys" in general is overreaching.
2012-12-10 09:59:33 AM  
1 votes:

BronyMedic: Apos: Mind-boggling idiocy. Alabama is clearly vying for a Fark tag.

Jake. It's Alabama. You can't do anything about it.

/Spent a lot of my life on the AL/TN/MS border. Jesus Christ, the stupidity.
//Jesus Christ seemed to have a lot to do with their stupidity, actually



they are ignorant and proud of it. they believe their ignorance is just as valuable as your knowledge.
2012-12-10 09:55:49 AM  
1 votes:

Arthur Jumbles: Theaetetus: Arthur Jumbles: Actually, that's not true. It's been found that toy preference is innately different between boys and girls. They tested this with monkey so as to avoid human cultural preferences and still found that the male baby monkeys preferred active toys while the girl monkeys liked dolls.

... except that the "active toys" and "dolls" had other variable differences. For example, the active toys had bright colors while the dolls had muted colors. Why isn't the conclusion that male monkeys have dimmer color vision? Furthermore, if you read the study, you find that the statement "the girl monkeys liked dolls" is false - the study actually found that girl monkeys preferred both toys equally, while the boy monkeys showed a slight preference for the brightly colored toy.

And finally, the study didn't avoid human cultural preferences at all - the toys were specifically chosen to be a "boy's toy" and a "girl's toy", and so the study was really testing how well monkeys conform to human stereotypes. And as the data showed, girl monkeys didn't conform - or, rather, no one likes passive bland toys that much.

The key point was there was a difference.... the researchers put there own interpretation upon the results, which I don't agree with, but the difference remained. Whether this was because of color, shape or smell it does prove that there were innate differences in preference by gender and the subjects weren't blank slates.


Uh, yes? Hooray? See above - this is straw feminism. No one claims there is no difference, so having a study that only proves conclusively that there's a difference is not contradicting any existing claims, nor does it support any other conclusion.
2012-12-10 09:48:44 AM  
1 votes:

ph0rk: Theaetetus: Do you have a citation to someone in the field who believes that, for example, men and women score exactly the same on SAT tests on average?

In the field of psychometrics? No. In allied fields, the sentiments are real and more common than I'd like.

In the span of an hour the same individual may claim:

A: Behaviorism is/was wrong. (theoretically, not morally)
B: GID is real, and the evidence often used for it is valid (innate differences)
C: There are no meaningful differences in intellect between males and females other than those that are learned.

These people have jobs and tenure.


So, still no... No one is claiming there are no differences - they're debating the reason for those differences (e.g. "learned), as I said. Hence why I submit that the claim that someone out there believes there are no differences is merely straw feminism.
2012-12-10 09:48:39 AM  
1 votes:

Big Ramifications: Secondly, if you read between the lines, clearly I'm asking: "OK, so it's not testosterone. Great. I'm happy for youse all. So why is there a difference? Coz there clearly is a difference by the time you get to leet university level mathematicians.

Got any ideas, chuckles?


Eh, I really think part of it is issues at the younger levels. Because if you don't get a strong math foundation as a kid, you are NOT going to be good, or interested in it at the higher levels. And we still have people saying "Oh, math is hard for girls", which would tend to encourage those having difficulty to just give up: since, clearly they can't understand because they're girls.

Which is an injustice, becuase math can be tricky, period.

And different people need it taught differently (much like physics. The teaching style needs to differ based on who's learning it, and for what purpose. Blasting through proof after proof is not, for instance, terribly helpful for engineering majors, if you don't give them examples, I've found.)
2012-12-10 09:46:06 AM  
1 votes:

Arthur Jumbles: Actually, that's not true. It's been found that toy preference is innately different between boys and girls. They tested this with monkey so as to avoid human cultural preferences and still found that the male baby monkeys preferred active toys while the girl monkeys liked dolls.


... except that the "active toys" and "dolls" had other variable differences. For example, the active toys had bright colors while the dolls had muted colors. Why isn't the conclusion that male monkeys have dimmer color vision? Furthermore, if you read the study, you find that the statement "the girl monkeys liked dolls" is false - the study actually found that girl monkeys preferred both toys equally, while the boy monkeys showed a slight preference for the brightly colored toy.

And finally, the study didn't avoid human cultural preferences at all - the toys were specifically chosen to be a "boy's toy" and a "girl's toy", and so the study was really testing how well monkeys conform to human stereotypes. And as the data showed, girl monkeys didn't conform - or, rather, no one likes passive bland toys that much.
2012-12-10 09:45:28 AM  
1 votes:

Linux_Yes: What's important to Alabamaians/The South: -not in any particular order-

1)God

2)Football - sports in general

3)Nascar

4)Booze

5) cliques (being in the 'right' social circles)

6) Race - the blacks are just as prejudiced as the whites

7)Republican party -- the majority (~60%) of Alabamaians (and the south) are Republican and poor. they don't even know who in D.C. is against their interests. they vote for their enemy in washington.


What is not important to Alabamaians/The South:

1) the ability to reason. the ability to take information/facts and make reasonable conclusions/judgments about them without using 'God' as a source.

2)Taxes -they're evil and ruining freedom. even though the South gets more Federal Money than any other section of the United States. ironic to say the least.



addendum:

forgot one:

FOX News is the only source of real news in the South. all other sources are lying 'librals'
2012-12-10 09:34:59 AM  
1 votes:
Successful Hot Male: "Clearly there's some issue here with energy retention, i just can't figure it out!"
Attractive Single Female: "Oh, that? If you simply use encapsulated phase-change materials in the node, then you could reduce the effects of the second law, thereby increasing energy retention efficiency...
Successful Hot Male: .......
Attractive Single Female: "uhhuh, i mean... Is that a sale on shoes? I LOVE shoes!"
2012-12-10 09:31:06 AM  
1 votes:

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: 2c

While there may be a lot of talk about how math and science are male subjects people should note that girls are either closing the gap or are now outperforming boys (depending on your location) and have been outperforming boys in language and literature for some time.

The idea that boys are better at math, or academia in general, is an idea built on very shaky foundations.


Boys are certainly better at dropping out of high school, not going to college, and not graduating from college if they do go, however.
2012-12-10 09:30:14 AM  
1 votes:

ph0rk: If you were a betting person you'd wager the individual from group a has a higher score than an individual from group b (absent individual evidence) because that is the safer bet.


If you were a betting person, you wouldn't take a bet with 10:1 odds against you unless the payoff was huge...

... which raises the question - what's the huge payoff in gender discrimination that leads people to enforce it?
2012-12-10 09:26:02 AM  
1 votes:
My wife excelled at math in high school to the point that in college she skipped Calc I, took Calc II and got an A (and got credit as if she took both classes). Despite this she majored in History, which she now regrets, largely because she felt that it was a woman's field, while math was a man's field. I have a female fried who is a chemistry post-doc (the field isn't as women deficient as math or physics, but it's still pretty bad), and she says there's constant, obvious low level gender discrimination, particularly when it comes to which CVs get selected for the interview round during job searches. It's not that women can't do the work at the grad level, it's that they know it will be such a lousy work environment that all but the most dedicated choose another field, or (like my wife) they just self selected out of the field before they started their undergrad.
2012-12-10 09:19:30 AM  
1 votes:

Snapper Carr: Snapper Carr: Was this book the article talks about written in the 40's?

Answered my own question - it was published in 2000


Heh. Sometimes I think we slipped a digit in the date...it's not 2012, it's 1012.

People think torture's a good way to get information, the Bible is literally true, the end days are on us, etc, etc...
2012-12-10 09:19:20 AM  
1 votes:

Rik01:
Whoever is responsible for reinstating a segregational system that was forcibly ended by law at the end of the 18th century needs to have his or her collective arses kicked and loose their positions of power and influence.

Humanity never fails to disappoint me.

 

Tea partiers and such live in a different world from the rest of us, their world revolves around the like of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck and their like minded friends in local AM radio and pulpits all over the USA. And somebody is paying Limbaugh et al for their efforts... it's not too hard to guess who but the machine is well financed and has been running for decades.

Resentment is the most powerful force in politics, well, after hatred but we're not there yet... yet.

Faz
2012-12-10 09:14:12 AM  
1 votes:

Theaetetus: In short, your "science" is non-existent and all of your claims are based on tenuous statistical connections made in reverse from a conclusion you already held, without evidence.


How is that much different than assuming there must be no difference and working towards that conclusion?
2012-12-10 09:10:52 AM  
1 votes:

MycroftHolmes: I believe that there is some constructive distance between 'acknowledging that different individuals have different needs'


There's also some constructive difference between "different individuals having different needs" and "different genders having different needs".

MycroftHolmes: Creating a false equivalency


entire gender (full of individuals) = individual
2012-12-10 09:09:38 AM  
1 votes:
Nice story on the Ada Lovelace's birthday, you know the woman who foresaw many of the uses for computers over a century before any of them were possible. That and the whole being the first programmer thing.
2012-12-10 08:52:20 AM  
1 votes:

SkunkWerks: MycroftHolmes: but is it not valid to recognize that women and men have different wiring, both physiologically as well as cognitively?

It's valid when your observation focuses on "wiring differences" that don't pertain to "having breasts", "missing penises" and "capacity to make sandwiches", yes.


You know, as much sandwich-making is frequently delegated to women, it is clearly an area that men excel at when dire circumstances force us to take matters into our own hands. Observe, sandwiches made by men:
bitesofbliss.files.wordpress.com
Sandwiches made by women:
4.bp.blogspot.com
2012-12-10 08:51:05 AM  
1 votes:

MycroftHolmes: So, you think that No Child Left Behind and mainstreanming of special needs students is the way to go?


As a one-time special needs student myself? No.

Then again, Mengele would have disposed of me, or used me in experiments since that was clearly the only useful purpose I could serve in any "civilized" society.
2012-12-10 08:30:10 AM  
1 votes:

MycroftHolmes: but is it not valid to recognize that women and men have different wiring, both physiologically as well as cognitively?


It's valid when your observation focuses on "wiring differences" that don't pertain to "having breasts", "missing penises" and "capacity to make sandwiches", yes.
2012-12-10 08:27:46 AM  
1 votes:

Arthur Jumbles: I'm really surprised no one has looked to see if the Alabama program is actually working, it's the first question I would have asked.


You did.

Would "why is it actually working?" be the second (assuming the first answer was an affirmative)?

'Cause that would by my second, particularly in a largely forgotten and abandoned school district where any sort of attention to the program is likely to improve scores.
2012-12-10 08:17:17 AM  
1 votes:

nekom: GAT_00: Having separate sex education classes by gender really doesn't sound like a problem. I'm pretty sure mine were. But then you get the section Subby quoted:

According to the complaint filed by the ACLU, instructions for teaching boys call for stressing heroic behavior that shows what it means to "be a man." According to the ACLU, the school relied on a book that teaches that boys are better than girls in math because their bodies receive daily surges of testosterone, while girls have similar skills only a few days per month when they experience increased estrogen during the menstrual cycle.

and I'm all with the ACLU here. What a crock of shiat.

Yeah, there are arguments to be made for gender segregation in some instances. This is NOT the way to make that argument.


The correct testosterone argument: Due to a flood of superfluous testosterone, boys find it har... er... more difficult to concentrate on their academic subjects when there are female students in yoga pants answering the problems on the board.

I could work with this.
2012-12-10 08:12:30 AM  
1 votes:

GAT_00: Having separate sex education classes by gender really doesn't sound like a problem. I'm pretty sure mine were. But then you get the section Subby quoted:

According to the complaint filed by the ACLU, instructions for teaching boys call for stressing heroic behavior that shows what it means to "be a man." According to the ACLU, the school relied on a book that teaches that boys are better than girls in math because their bodies receive daily surges of testosterone, while girls have similar skills only a few days per month when they experience increased estrogen during the menstrual cycle.

and I'm all with the ACLU here. What a crock of shiat.


Yeah, there are arguments to be made for gender segregation in some instances. This is NOT the way to make that argument.
2012-12-10 08:10:30 AM  
1 votes:
My female child who is kicking ass in her math and science classes frowns upon these shenanigans.

gadian: I couldn't get the help I needed in Math chemistry even though I asked for it. They told me that chem is hard and because I'm a girl I'd be better off focusing on reading anyway. I could read just fine and would have preferred the help learning chemistry.


And yeah, that, fixed up for my own needs. Except for the growing up in the South thing. I grew up in the top education state in the country and still felt this way.

I was also told, "It doesn't really matter what you pick for a career, because you'll only be doing it until you have kids anyway." This was in the 80s, not the 50s.
2012-12-10 07:58:36 AM  
1 votes:
The last wonder in the world surely has to be why women are still voting GOP?
2012-12-10 07:33:15 AM  
1 votes:

orbister: Big Ramifications: IIRC the book cites the absurdly lopsided ratio of male:female mathematics doctorates as proof.

That's an interesting question. When I was at university, maths was roughly 50:50 at undergraduate level and roughly 20:1 male to female at postgrad. Physics, on the other hand, had a much higher proportion of women postgrads than undergrads.


I completed a PhD dissertation in a physics discipline with a significant topology/matrix mechanics focus. I probably could have gone into a pure topology field because I love abstract math, topo in particular.

However, i tried to be practical....the job prospects for a purely math postgrad degree weren't great, and I wouldn't want to be an actuary if all else failed, so off to the applied sciences I went.

Anecdote =/= data but I suspect there is some selection towards applied mathematics for other female scientists. If we are launching ourselves towards a degree in STEM, it's good to know we can compete for real jobs.

Plus, the culture in math and the physical sciences is pretty funny. There is a huge component of nerdiness coupled with machismo...I often found it alienating, like the sweaty smell most of my classmates would infuse the classroom with. Lucky for me, I love science more than that.
2012-12-10 07:19:55 AM  
1 votes:
I couldn't get the help I needed in Math even though I asked for it. They told me that math is hard and because I'm a girl I'd be better off focusing on reading anyway. I could read just fine and would have preferred the help learning percentages. Why yes, I did grow up in the south. Though, to be fair, my problem with math goes way beyond what tutoring can fix, it borders on illiteracy.
2012-12-10 07:09:31 AM  
1 votes:

BiffSpiffy: Just a quick question (I think).

Why is everyone posting about Alabama? The article is from the Newspaper in Alabama, but I think they have pulled one over on FARK folks.

In the first sentence it states "Birmingham's Huffman Middle School and another district in Idaho"

I'm not sure, and I could be wrong, but this is all about Idaho, not Alabama. In the actual article it talks about Birmingham. Maybe they are speaking about Birmingham, England.


=====

Well they both have a lot in common.

/potato
2012-12-10 07:03:16 AM  
1 votes:
Um...Idaho. Anyone else catch that?
2012-12-10 06:40:55 AM  
1 votes:

SkunkWerks: Bontesla: The difference begins at middle school.

Hey, learning is life-long.

By which I mean stereotypes about how you learn are reinforced from birth to death of course.


Absolutely.
There was an interesting study that looks at how teachers reinforce gender bias in the way they respond to students. This study was published in the 50s and has been recreated each time the phenomen was studied.
2012-12-10 06:33:54 AM  
1 votes:

ghostwind: swingerofbirches: It doesn't make a lot of sense. If this program is so great, you might as well test kids for their testosterone levels so they're in the right group. Testosterone levels vary wildly between individuals. I'm an XY male with idiopathic secondary hypogonadism (basically a pituitary issue causes me to have low testosterone and they don't know why) and I have similar testosterone levels to an XX friend of mine who has PCOS. I went through two years of calculus in high school (I forget what they called it, AB, BC, soemthing like that), and did fine with testosterone levels that I assume were low back then as well.

But to throw all boys together and all girls together is a bit crude scientifically (if there really was any science to begin with).

I can also tell you the gay kids will suffer. It will be hell. The same way that they say there are less distractions, being with only the same gender becomes this torturous world where you observe what you like but can't do anything about while having to try to act like a normal person to not get found out. In short, gay guys need straight girls. Especially in Alabama.

I think something that many people overlook with these kinds of correlations is that elevated testosterone does not mean a whole lot at the end of the day... the brain only has a certain number testosterone receptors in the brain. Produce more than the receptors can handle, then nothing happens... At the end of the day, the author that wrote this book probably has a very limited understanding of the endocrine system and how it works in the body. What is even worse, is that the educators have even less of an understanding of it than he does...  The end result is an ACLU lawsuit against the school.


This is it in a nutshell.
2012-12-10 06:27:16 AM  
1 votes:

Big Ramifications: Metalithic: IIRC the book cites the absurdly lopsided ratio of male:female mathematics doctorates as proof.

So what exactly are you saying? That a predominance of male mathematics postgraduates is proof that testosterone makes you a math wiz?
~
~
Firstly, I'm asking why there is a difference. Not saying why there is a difference [albeit in a smartass way - try not to get too butt hurt].

Secondly, if you read between the lines, clearly I'm asking: "OK, so it's not testosterone. Great. I'm happy for youse all. So why is there a difference? Coz there clearly is a difference by the time you get to leet university level mathematicians.

Got any ideas, chuckles?


The difference begins at middle school. Either female students get dumber or we systematically give the advantage to male students. Considering many studies support the latter, I'm going with that.
2012-12-10 06:15:26 AM  
1 votes:
The ACLU has a problem with this

But why should the ACLU have all the fun, eh?


Rik01: The older I get, the more absolutely stupid humanity seems to become.


Humanity has been circling the drain more or less since it was invented... or at the very least, since the means to comment on it in public was invented. And I've remained unconvinced by such "unique insights" more or less since I was invented.

That said, Stupid (like every other trend or fashion) never really becomes forever passe. It just goes out of style for a while before being revived yet again at some opportune time.
2012-12-10 05:58:42 AM  
1 votes:

yukichigai: Then Captain Derpy here reads that bit about "the brain requires testosterone or estrogen", doesn't bother to check his units, and winds up publishing a book full of crap.


Captain Derpy has published multiple books on the topic, and I am sure his bank account has benefited quite nicely as a result.
2012-12-10 05:48:11 AM  
1 votes:

Big Ramifications: Metalithic: IIRC the book cites the absurdly lopsided ratio of male:female mathematics doctorates as proof.

So what exactly are you saying? That a predominance of male mathematics postgraduates is proof that testosterone makes you a math wiz?
~
~
Firstly, I'm asking why there is a difference. Not saying why there is a difference [albeit in a smartass way - try not to get too butt hurt].

Secondly, if you read between the lines, clearly I'm asking: "OK, so it's not testosterone. Great. I'm happy for youse all. So why is there a difference? Coz there clearly is a difference by the time you get to leet university level mathematicians.

Got any ideas, chuckles?


Well, there do appear to be some differences in brain organization and structure between males and females. Hormones have been mentioned in scientific articles as a possible factor (I did a search on Google Scholar and found some papers in reputable journals, but I just had time to glance at the abstracts), so I guess the testosterone theory may be a bizarre misinterpretation of actual research. However it seems that many factors are involved, and I imagine that our cultural attitudes toward math and gender have some effect.
2012-12-10 05:43:49 AM  
1 votes:

Porous Horace: Oh, so now science is "bad"?


No, but Pseudoscience like this is.
2012-12-10 05:40:19 AM  
1 votes:

Big Ramifications: Secondly, if you read between the lines, clearly I'm asking: "OK, so it's not testosterone. Great. I'm happy for youse all. So why is there a difference? Coz there clearly is a difference by the time you get to leet university level mathematicians.

Got any ideas, chuckles?



Maybe gender bias is still prevalent in the education system.
2012-12-10 05:35:56 AM  
1 votes:
Can we just dedicate an entire HD channel to Alabama and give David Attenborough a contract?
2012-12-10 05:06:04 AM  
1 votes:

ByOwlLight: CSS time:

They tried splitting out girls and boys into our own gym classes one year at my high school. The reasoning was that girls and boys have different interests in physical activities. Really, I think my teacher just really, really wanted to teach dance and they knew the boys wouldn't go for it.

Well, we girls didn't really go for it, either. It was supposed to be some six-week course, going through all the different major types of dance. ...while the boys got to screw around playing basketball. By the second week, we were pretty close to mutiny, and if you have never seen 70+ teenaged girls all sulking around in a room with a smoldering look of fury in their eyes, well. You can imagine.

Anyway, by that point, my teacher, god love her, realized what was happening. So she decided to hold a vote. Continue dance or play tennis with the shiattiest ping-pong paddle-sized plastic racquets you've ever seen? And oh man, it was like a TV show, the way she said it all. "Who would like to continue with our wonderful study of dance, ranging in a wide selection of important historical, cultural, blahblahblah" and on. One girl raised her hand. Then she said, flatly, "...and who would like to play tennis?"

We voted for tennis.

Best month of gym class ever, eight of us to a court with those shiatty plastic racquets and all. We had a hell of a great time.

I think that's what finally broke my teacher's heart in gym, though, and convinced her to stick to teaching English. She was great at that.


Wow, thats the exact opposite of my experience in middle school. Part of our required PE curriculum was to learn folk dances from all over the world, from the American south to Japan, Israel, Mexico etc. Some of the dances required us to partner up and hold hands. Obviously there wasn't a perfect 50/50 split of gender in the class, so there were a bunch of same sex dance partnerships going on. Our teacher said "Anyone who complains will have to run laps" so no one complained.

Surprisingly, it was the best PE class we had ever had. Unlike previous PE classes were we would play sports and compete against each other, the folk dance classes required the entire class to work together to perform and pass. Everyone looked forward to class and was always in good spirits afterwards, both the boys and girls. By the end of the class we had learned several dances from many different cultures flawlessly. I don't think I ever came out of a PE class feeling so accomplished.
2012-12-10 04:36:35 AM  
1 votes:

Porous Horace: Oh, so now science is "bad"?


This word doesn't mean what I think you think it means in this context.
2012-12-10 04:26:36 AM  
1 votes:
Are the Asian and Eastern European students in different classes also?
/They have kilotons of testosterone following in each one of them
2012-12-10 04:26:01 AM  
1 votes:

Big Ramifications: IIRC the book cites the absurdly lopsided ratio of male:female mathematics doctorates as proof.


That's an interesting question. When I was at university, maths was roughly 50:50 at undergraduate level and roughly 20:1 male to female at postgrad. Physics, on the other hand, had a much higher proportion of women postgrads than undergrads.
2012-12-10 04:22:00 AM  
1 votes:
CSS time:

They tried splitting out girls and boys into our own gym classes one year at my high school. The reasoning was that girls and boys have different interests in physical activities. Really, I think my teacher just really, really wanted to teach dance and they knew the boys wouldn't go for it.

Well, we girls didn't really go for it, either. It was supposed to be some six-week course, going through all the different major types of dance. ...while the boys got to screw around playing basketball. By the second week, we were pretty close to mutiny, and if you have never seen 70+ teenaged girls all sulking around in a room with a smoldering look of fury in their eyes, well. You can imagine.

Anyway, by that point, my teacher, god love her, realized what was happening. So she decided to hold a vote. Continue dance or play tennis with the shiattiest ping-pong paddle-sized plastic racquets you've ever seen? And oh man, it was like a TV show, the way she said it all. "Who would like to continue with our wonderful study of dance, ranging in a wide selection of important historical, cultural, blahblahblah" and on. One girl raised her hand. Then she said, flatly, "...and who would like to play tennis?"

We voted for tennis.

Best month of gym class ever, eight of us to a court with those shiatty plastic racquets and all. We had a hell of a great time.

I think that's what finally broke my teacher's heart in gym, though, and convinced her to stick to teaching English. She was great at that.
2012-12-10 04:18:53 AM  
1 votes:
[kitten jumps up carefully into Rik01's lap, purrs nicely]
2012-12-10 04:16:52 AM  
1 votes:

Big Ramifications: Metalithic: IIRC the book cites the absurdly lopsided ratio of male:female mathematics doctorates as proof.

So what exactly are you saying? That a predominance of male mathematics postgraduates is proof that testosterone makes you a math wiz?
~
~
Firstly, I'm asking why there is a difference. Not saying why there is a difference [albeit in a smartass way - try not to get too butt hurt].

Secondly, if you read between the lines, clearly I'm asking: "OK, so it's not testosterone. Great. I'm happy for youse all. So why is there a difference? Coz there clearly is a difference by the time you get to leet university level mathematicians.

Got any ideas, chuckles?


Here's your answer: They aren't. Through middle school girls tend to edge out boys in math scores on standardized tests. In high school they tend to tie.
2012-12-10 04:13:11 AM  
1 votes:

tinfoil-hat maggie: Kittypie070: BLAGGH.

I do NOT like my wimmenfolks fleshy.

I trot the streets and human-watch and eeeewww the sights I see.


Wait are you in Bama? I'm confused now but I do agree, hmmm.


I visited there once.
2012-12-10 04:11:12 AM  
1 votes:

Metalithic: IIRC the book cites the absurdly lopsided ratio of male:female mathematics doctorates as proof.

So what exactly are you saying? That a predominance of male mathematics postgraduates is proof that testosterone makes you a math wiz?

~
~
Firstly, I'm asking why there is a difference. Not saying why there is a difference [albeit in a smartass way - try not to get too butt hurt].

Secondly, if you read between the lines, clearly I'm asking: "OK, so it's not testosterone. Great. I'm happy for youse all. So why is there a difference? Coz there clearly is a difference by the time you get to leet university level mathematicians.

Got any ideas, chuckles?
2012-12-10 04:02:07 AM  
1 votes:

Big Ramifications: Somacandra: FTFA: According to the ACLU, the school relied on a book that teaches that boys are better than girls in math because their bodies receive daily surges of testosterone, while girls have similar skills only a few days per month when they experience increased estrogen during the menstrual cycle.

Downloaded and read the PDF complaint. Seems to center around this book:

[i.imgur.com image 350x523] 

Does a lot of "gender science." Not sure what that is supposed to mean, except it heavily priveldges nature over nurt
~
~
So why ARE boys better at math? My reference is a similar-sounding book called Brain Sex.
[i50.tinypic.com image 121x187]

IIRC the book cites the absurdly lopsided ratio of male:female mathematics doctorates as proof.

b-b-but sexism at universities!

b-b-but child rearing duties!

b-b-but male hegemony!


So what exactly are you saying? That a predominance of male mathematics postgraduates is proof that testosterone makes you a math wiz?
2012-12-10 03:55:02 AM  
1 votes:
Makes sense. Beating Your Wife 101 would result in better scores from the males.
2012-12-10 03:54:06 AM  
1 votes:

Snapper Carr: Was this book the article talks about written in the 40's?


Answered my own question - it was published in 2000
2012-12-10 03:49:59 AM  
1 votes:
Holy shiat. I thought the headline was one of those quotes that doesn't appear in the article Fark cliche. Was this book the article talks about written in the 40's?
2012-12-10 03:40:39 AM  
1 votes:

kingoomieiii: doglover: Here is a stereotype I know about one of the parties in this headline with no other context 

[t0.gstatic.com image 278x181]


i25.photobucket.com
2012-12-10 03:37:13 AM  
1 votes:
BLAGGH.

I do NOT like my wimmenfolks fleshy.

I trot the streets and human-watch and eeeewww the sights I see.
2012-12-10 03:31:12 AM  
1 votes:

BarkingUnicorn: Benevolent Misanthrope: Not only the math thing - the boys also get daily exercise while the girls are kept quiet. How the fark does anyone get the idea that girls don't need exercise?!

I mean, that's stupid even for Alabama.

They likes their wimminfolks fleshy.


We're in America. That's where school kids start these days.

/fat
2012-12-10 02:56:42 AM  
1 votes:

TheHopeDiamond: How about we stop sending foreign aid to third-world developing countries and send it to farking Alabama?


How about you stop making fun of the best school system on the planet? Alabama was first place out of fifty states in getting the lowest science test scores. It's no wonder we kick your butts at football.
2012-12-10 02:30:28 AM  
1 votes:
Not only the math thing - the boys also get daily exercise while the girls are kept quiet. How the fark does anyone get the idea that girls don't need exercise?!

I mean, that's stupid even for Alabama.
2012-12-10 02:25:55 AM  
1 votes:
According to the ACLU, the school relied on a book that teaches that boys are better than girls in math because their bodies receive daily surges of testosterone, while girls have similar skills only a few days per month when they experience increased estrogen during the menstrual cycle.

20prospect.files.wordpress.com

/Oblig, hot and wrong.
2012-12-10 01:17:31 AM  
1 votes:

kingoomieiii: doglover: Here is a stereotype I know about one of the parties in this headline with no other context 

[t0.gstatic.com image 278x181]


I say, I say, I say, that's a joke, son.
 
Displayed 100 of 100 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report