You're jumping to a conclusion. I think its fair to say that the the point the anti-"we are all equal" camp is trying to make is that men have higer representation on the ends of the bell curve. People at both ends (the truly brilliant and truly unable) of the bell curve are largely skewed towards men. Not entirely, but highly disproportionately. This is a perfectly viable explanation for the lack of female leaders in most any field. And freedom of academic choice and opportunities for several decades now, at least in the west, hasn't seemed to change the result, which would seem to reinforce this theory, whereas it would seem to discount the environment argument, in my opinion.
I don't think any of us have asserted that women can't be brilliant and compete head to head with men, but if you are looking at any field of expertise, with equal numbers of male and female participants, the top one to five percent of people will almost always be disproportionately men, consistently across fields, over time, and it seems to continue despite changing social and cultural norms.
I think the comment above calls into question the merit of your friends achievement, which will always be the result of affirmative action programs. It is well documented that affirmative action often (but not always) results in lesser skilled candidates from preferred disadvantaged classes (race, gender, etc) earning admission or appointments.
I think the comment above calls into question the merit of your friends achievement, which will always be the result of affirmative action programs.
How can you say that? Do you know her or what she is capable of? It seems pure idiocy to me to suggest that every woman graduating from a premier science program is never achieving it through merit.
As far as bell curves and distributions, who the hell knows?
People tried to predict housing prices and stock portfolios on gaussians, and they seem to work until they don't. You cannot project your platonic ideal of how you think the world works because it seems to and then handwave on outliers.
women, who have their professional involvement with math decrease dramatically as they enter the working world and need to support themselves. There's a strong, though not certain case for a cultural effect here.
Oh, Bono was always in it for the money. It's worth noting that Bjork intends to invest in Iceland and Bono has moved all his money out of Ireland and into offshore tax havens.
http://www.google.com/search?q=The+Case+Against+Perfection+M...
The Case Against Perfection What's wrong with designer children, bionic athletes , and genetic engineering by Michael J. Sandel