zlacker

Actually, Summer's claims were much narrower - he said that boys tend to deviate from the mean more. That is, it's not that men are superior, it's that there are more boy geniuses and more boy idiots.

Decades of research shows that teachers give girls better grades than boys of the same ability. This is not some new revelation.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nickmorrison/2022/10/17/teacher...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31751672

A whole cohort of boys got screwed over by the cancellation of exams during Covid. That is just reality, and no amount of creepy male feminist posturing is going to change that. Rather, denying issues in boys education is liable to increase male resentment and bitterness, something we've already witnessed over the past few years.

>>jadams+(OP)
I quoted one of the unsupported claims that Summers made - that "there are issues of intrinsic aptitude" which help explain lower representation of women. Not, you know, millennia of sexism and often violent oppression. This is the exact same kind of arguments that racists make - any observed differences must be "intrinsic".

If Summers had in fact limited himself to the statistical claims, it would have been less of an issue. He would still have been wrong, but he wouldn't have been so obviously sexist.

It's easy to refute Summers' claims, and in fact conclude that the complete opposite of what he was saying is more likely true. "Gender, Culture, and mathematics performance"(https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0901265106) gives several examples that show that the variability as well as male-dominance that Summers described is not present in all cultures, even within the US - for example, among Asian American students in Minnesota state assessments, "more girls than boys scored above the 99th percentile." Clearly, this isn't an issue of "intrinsic aptitude" as Summers claimed.

> A whole cohort of boys got screwed over by the cancellation of exams during Covid.

I'm glad we've identified the issue that triggered you. But your grievances on that matter are utterly irrelevant to what I wrote.

> no amount of creepy male feminist posturing is going to change that

It's always revealing when someone arguing against bigotry is accused of "posturing". You apparently can't imagine that someone might not share your prejudices, and so the only explanation must be that they're "posturing".

> increase male resentment and bitterness

That's a choice you've apparently personally made. I'd recommend taking more responsibility for your own life.

>>antonv+r3
> which help explain lower representation of women

Yes, they do help explain that. This does not preclude other influences. You can't go two sentences without making a logical error, it's quite pathetic.

I'll do you a favour and disregard the rest of your post - you deviate from the mean a bit too much for this to be worth it. Just try not to end up like Michael Kimmel, lol.