The New York Times > Science > Gray Matter and Sexes: A Scientific Gray Area

There is something I don't understand about this debate. Let say, just for the sake of argument, that science can prove that men, in general, are better than women at some well defined branch of science. What does that mean? Should we therefore assume that a woman who is making strides in that branch should be denied advancement? Does that mean that all men are better qualified than all women at the science? I sure doubt that!

I guess the problem is that we (as a part of the human race) tend not to treat people with uniform respect, but we treat them based on our expectations of them. This is, of course, wrong, but it's what we do. So if some branch of science lowers our expectations on an identifiable class of humans, we treat them with lowered expectations. Shame on us.

Finally, get this quote (from the Times article):

A century ago, the French scientist Gustav Le Bon pointed to the smaller brains of women - closer in size to gorillas', he said - and said that explained the "fickleness, inconstancy, absence of thought and logic, and incapacity to reason" in women.

I wonder if he was married, and what his wife had to say about this!