When Stalin was in charge of the Soviet Union, "enemies of the state" would often appear in public to recant their "crimes." When Ivy League presidents mention uncomfortable truths about human sex differences, they pretty much have to do the same thing:
"I have long been aware of the many challenges women face in pursuing academic careers, but in the past several weeks the nature and extent of these challenges have been made particularly vivid to me," said President Summers. "It is time for Harvard to step up and affirm in strong and concrete terms its commitment to the advancement and support of women pursuing academic careers...."Does anyone seriously think Harvard has been discouraging women from seeking tenure?
As far as I know, nobody has taken the time to refute Summers' original point: men tend to be overrepresented at the left and right ends of the bell curve when it comes to math and science aptitude, so they will be overrepresented at the elite levels of those disciplines. (They also make up a higher proportion of the remedial students.) That doesn't mean "women can't do math or science." It simply means that fewer women have the capacity to do those things at the highest levels of achievement.
Also, it's a well-known fact that women give birth, and many of these mothers want to care for their children full-time, at least while they (the kids) are young and helpless. This is great for the kids, but it can put one's career in slow-motion for a while.
And what's wrong with that? In the grand scheme of things, what's more important — being a good mother, or being a good Harvard professor? (Hint: dozens of societies have succeeded without Harvard professors, but no society has figured out how to perpetuate itself without mothers.)
And would you also expect children's fathers to put their careers "in slow-motion for a while" to spend more time with their children? Mind you, I'm not suggesting that both parents quit their jobs (that would be impossible). But as an example, if a father was offered a promotion, but the catch would be that he would rarely be home and would almost never get to spend time with his wife and children -- should he take the promotion?
if a father was offered a promotion, but the catch would be that he would rarely be home and would almost never get to spend time with his wife and children -- should he take the promotion?
Of course not, unless there were a grave financial need and no other way to meet it.
I'm pretty sure I could get a higher-paying job and make a lot more than I'm making now. However, I've chosen to take positions that are interesting, have some relation to serving the public, and (most importantly) will not take an excessive amount of time away from my family.
As the Coward says, some men really have the dire need to work as much as possible to support their families. Thankfully, we live in a country where that isn't terribly common.
That sounded a little self-righteous...I meant to add that I'm grateful to God that I have the option of taking jobs that I enjoy, and that get me home in time for dinner.
Now that women outnumber men in both undergraduate and graduate studies, it would seem that the young men of America need encouragement and support to pursue higher education and bring their talents to fruition.
Makes you feel nostalgia for the good ole days when heretics had the courage to stand up for their convictions. Summers is spineless.
My oldest daughter is a physical therapist with a doctorate. She has a rigorous education in the sciences. Fortunately she can work a very flexible schedule. It would be a tragedy if she pursued a career that made being a mother impossible.
Thanks so much for standing up for stay at home moms. Everytime there is a study showing the importance of the mother staying at home, it gets buried away. I rarely even see Catholic publications talk about it. Anyway, thanks.
I know many stay-at-home moms, including one with whom I share a bed, so it's in my best interest to praise them. ;)
Hey, TMI, dude. TMI.