Home » feminism » Women in science: science is ‘sexist’

Women in science: science is ‘sexist’

At The Federalist, Joy Pullmann quotes from a female PhD candidate who pronounces science to be ‘sexist’ — because it’s not subjective. Apparently women and minorities can’t ‘do’ objectivity and logic.

(An aside: why are ‘women and minorities‘ always lumped together, as over against White males, as if they have some kind of implicit bond, or commonality — other than, say, not being able to handle objectivity, logic and reason, maybe?)

Well, I’ll buy that; many if not most women (and certain minorities) cannot seem to handle logic or objectivity. The thing is, the old feminists, before feminism went completely off the rails, did not admit that women were incapable of being logical or objective. To admit such a thing would be to concede the assertions made by those bad old “male chauvinists”. Incidentally, that term ‘male chauvinist’ was before the term ‘sexist’ was invented. But in any case, feminists wouldn’t admit that women are prone to being subjective, primarily emotion-driven, and prone to illogic.

And I say this as a woman.

Sure, there are exceptions to every rule, though they are sometimes very thin on the ground, and the feminists relied heavily on pointing to some rare exception, a female with a very high IQ, or a woman who accomplished something in a scientific field. Marie Curie comes immediately to mind; she served as an example that was supposed to prove that women could be just as good at science as men. As if an exception ever disproves a rule, though people still resort to that kind of argument more than ever, especially with regard to minorities. Example: George Washington Carver, the black male equivalent of Marie Curie, or is it the other way around.

Recently I was reading a piece about 1940s actress, Hedy Lamarr, in which it was said that she invented something called Spread Spectrum Technology. I admit, that means nothing to me; I was not a science major though I was very interested in science. Now, Miss Lamarr admittedly had a co-inventor there, a George Anthiel. Oddly, he was not a scientist either, but a composer of avant-garde music. So the story is rather strange. In any case it appears she did not produce any other ‘inventions’.

Speaking of Hollywood actresses, there was another actress, Jill St. John, who allegedly had a genius-level IQ, reported to be 170 or so, though some sources said slightly less. However even though later it was reported that the whole ‘genius’ story was cooked up by her publicity agent to set her apart from that year’s current starlets, the story is still repeated as here on the Wikipedia page.  Once lies have been told, they are hard to refute; nobody ever reads the refutations. So I can’t help wondering if Hedy Lamarr’s ‘invention’ was another publicity story.

Maybe I am too suspicious. In Hedy Lamarr’s day, there was not the social pressure to ‘shatter the stereotypes’ about women and minorities, but in today’s climate there is increasing social pressure to exaggerate or hype any accomplishment by a woman or a nonwhite minority in order to “prove” that stereotypes have no basis.

But then feminists like this Laura Parson are perpetuating what they call ”stereotypes” in admitting that women do not have logical or objective minds, as a rule. But instead of saying the obvious, that maybe women (or womenandminorities) are just not made for science careers generally, they recommend that science change to suit womenandminorities.

The writer of the Federalist piece, unfortunately, resorts to egalitarian/liberal arguments, ultimately, but in any event, the point is made that feminists and all egalitarians have to resort to all kinds of convoluted and bizarre flights of rhetoric because the facts are not on their side.

 

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Women in science: science is ‘sexist’

  1. I’ve never seen any compelling evidence or credible scientific research that said women were less objective. Few men are capable of discussing race and immigration in a logical, rational, or objective way. In the manosphere you will find all kinds of misogynists like Roissy, Roosh, Milo, etc. who know nothing about science or evolutionary psychology, but pretend like they do and constantly make crazy claims. (Incidentally, I think all three are non-white but admired by many so-called WNs. Roosh has even bragged about non-consensual sex with white women in his books.) Even maybe the most common claim that women are slightly less intelligent is false:

    http://www.livescience.com/21647-men-women-iq-scores.html

    Like

  2. You’ll notice that I didn’t claim that IQ scores differed that much between men and women. But women and men differ in their kinds of intelligence. There’s just no denying that women don’t have the kind of minds that make for skills at the hard sciences. They are not often inventors. Without ‘affirmative action’ they would probably not be able to enter science and engineering fields in any great numbers, nor to succeed on the same level as men. If they are, why are they not doing so, despite being given a leg-up by AA and by society encouraging women to compete with men in those fields?
    I won’t disagree that today, both sexes are less able to discuss things in a logical or objective way, especially the younger generations who have been badly educated. But I think it’s generally acknowledged that women are less capable of objectivity than men. I am not sure why you are disputing this.
    By the way I mentioned I am female, so I am making observations about my own sex, which I know very well, and I am not excluding myself from some of these flaws.

    Like

  3. Interesting article, VA. I believe that women have the same logical ability as men, but female emotion has a tendency to override that ability. A perfect example was my mother. As a college math teacher, she could analyze algebraic equations with the best of them. But when we had a family crisis her emotions often would kick in, and my father would have to sort things out and figure a solution.

    Regarding IQ, I’ve read it’s about the same on average for male and female. However, men have a higher proportion of genius IQs, but they also have a higher percentage in the idiot range. Women tend to be in the middle.

    Whatever the averages are, I have the highest respect for your insight and analysis. It far exceeds that of most men I know.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s