The maths gender gap continues to exist, with boys continuing to outperform girls at all levels. But what is more striking is the extent of the gap at the top, between the brightest girls compared to the brightest boys. This is where we see the biggest gap in maths, despite recent reports that the gap is closing. … Given it’s usually the highest performing students that are likely to go on to higher education or in to jobs in science and technology, this has huge implications for initiatives which have been designed to encourage girls into STEM fields and reduce gender discrimination. They seem ineffective, given this gap between boys and girls remains.
Although gender differences on average are not under dispute, the idea of consistently and inflexibly gender-typed individuals is. … That is, there are not two distinct genders, but instead there are linear gradations of variables associated with sex, such as masculinity or intimacy, all of which are continuous.
In the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
, a new analysis
of 122 different characteristics from 13,301 individuals across 13 studies throws cold water in the face of the assumption that men and women are inherently different.
Study looks at the demographics of New York Times obituaries over the past 70 years. Some of the findings:
• In the 1940s and ’50s, the paper ran many more obits than it does today; some were but a single paragraph.
• Prior to 1960, cause of death was not always included; today, it usually is. In our survey, aids was first listed as a cause of death in 1992.
• Where the dead were educated has remained relatively constant: The Ivy League reigns supreme.
• The obits have always been male-heavy. In 1972, a typical female obit was two paragraphs, and spoke not of the deceased’s accomplishments but of those of her husband and sons.
• Starting in the 1990s, the obits became more diverse, racially and ethnically, but also in terms of people who had distinguished themselves in occupations other than business or politics—attorneys, artists, scientists, athletes, and actors.
Previously, the appalling gender ratios of mainstream media’s obituaries.
Appalling gender-ratio stat of the day: Mainstream media don’t seem to care when we lose notable women.
It’s Malala Day, an open call to bring education to every child and outlaw discrimination against girls.
Whenever the subject of women in science comes up, there are people fiercely committed to the idea that sexism does not exist. They will point to everything and anything else to explain differences while becoming angry and condescending if you even suggest that discrimination could be a factor. But these people are wrong. This data shows they are wrong.
Despite what Einstein may have advised a girl looking to go into science, a new study demonstrates the persistent gender bias amongst science faculty, thwarting a truly equal opportunity.
As Scientific American’s Ilana Yurkiewicz puts it, “This is really important. This is really important.” Read it.
It has to do with adaptability. Women, Rosin argues, are like immigrants who have moved to a new country. They see a new social context, and they flexibly adapt to new circumstances. Men are like immigrants who have physically moved to a new country but who have kept their minds in the old one. They speak the old language. They follow the old mores. Men are more likely to be rigid; women are more fluid.
This theory has less to do with innate traits and more to do with social position. When there’s big social change, the people who were on the top of the old order are bound to cling to the old ways. The people who were on the bottom are bound to experience a burst of energy. They’re going to explore their new surroundings more enthusiastically.