lukne wrote:

> Here is a good article about gender differences.  I'll be somewhat
> interested in what you guys think of it. I found it in Salon.com.
>
> Just like a woman
> Lawrence Summers was right about one thing: There are innate
> differences between males and females. And if we want everyone to
> succeed, we shouldn't dismiss them.
>
> By Lorraine Dusky
>
> March 2, 2005  |  Others besides me have noticed that most
> whistle-blowers of late have been women -- former Enron vice president
> Sherron Watkins, retired FBI agent Coleen Rowley and former WorldCom
> audit executive Cynthia Cooper. To underscore the point, Time made
> these three its Persons of the Year in 2002. Recently, HealthSouth
> financial executive Diana Henze joined the ranks of female
> whistle-blowers.
>
> Could it be that women generally are more ethical than men? Yes, wrote
> Harvard University's Carol Gilligan more than two decades ago in the
> book "In a Different Voice." While some hemmed and hawed, Gilligan's
> argument was largely embraced by feminists. Now others are saying that
> women are more likely to be the straight shooters who cry foul when
> they see their corporate companions jiggering the books. "Women Are
> More Likely to Blow Whistle" announced a 2002 headline in the Los
> Angeles Times.
>
> "Women see things in a much bigger context than do men," says Judith
> Rosener, a professor at the University of California at Irvine. In
> "Ways Women Lead," a 2002 Harvard Business School e-book, Rosener
> proclaims that a woman's way of leading -- interactive, cooperative,
> inclusive and personal -- is profoundly different from the traditional
> male way of leading, which she calls "command and control."
She goes on
> to say that women consider the larger implications of their actions
> when making a business decision, while men focus on the immediate: that
> is, how much money they're going to make, or whether they're likely to
> get caught.
>
> Rosener's statements barely caused a ripple, and women generally nodded
> in agreement. In contrast, all hell broke loose when Lawrence Summers,
> the president of Harvard, said that one reason women don't ascend to
> the highest positions in science might be due to the "intrinsic
> aptitude" of men in this area. Incidentally, Summers also listed
> old-fashioned gender discrimination and the lower likelihood that women
> will take jobs requiring incredibly long hours as other reasons women
> do not get the top jobs in the sciences, which has been largely
> overlooked in the firestorm following his comments. (This isn't the
> first time Summers has been in the hot seat. Previous comments about
> other matters also provoked controversy, and his "imperious, abrasive"
> leadership style has become part of the discussion about whether he
> should stay or go.)
>
> All this happened back in mid-January, but the issue is still blazing
> in practically every major media outlet. Yet where was the fury when
> some saw in the ranks of the women whistle-blowers not only a greater
> willingness to come forward than shown by their male peers, but also a
> difference in style -- and yes, morality? There was none.
>
> We generally agree that women are more likely to consider how their
> actions affect others, thus making them more collegial than men in
> their work habits. And no one doubts that women are more in touch with
> their feelings, are better able to express them and, consequently, have
> better interpersonal skills. A woman prefers to share how she feels,
> while her mate would rather debate whether Barry Bonds' steroid-fueled
> records ought to have an asterisk after them.
>
> The root of this touchy-feely stuff can be traced to a specific section
> of the brain, the limbic system. Females have a larger, deeper limbic
> system than males do -- which is believed to make women more empathic
> than men, and better caretakers to boot. The upshot of this is that, by
> and large, moms, more than dads, want to stay home with the kids and to
> not work killer hours once they do go to work, regardless of the
> rewards.
>
> Whether the seat of women's empathy developed over centuries in the
> cave, when men were out hunting and women were gathering and taking
> care of the babies, is immaterial. The Human Genome Project found that
> the differences between the races is minuscule (one-hundredth of 1
> percent) compared with the difference between the sexes (a whopping 1
> to 2 percent). The difference is there, and today we have to deal with
> what is, not with what we wish for.
>
> Brain biology points up another variation: Women's brains have a larger
> corpus callosum -- the connective tissue between the right and left
> sides of the brain -- whose job it is to transfer data back and forth.
> Consequently, women integrate incoming data faster than men do. Women's
> intuitive "sixth sense" about when the baby in the nursery is going to
> start squawking, or the boss is about to blow a gasket, or what someone
> else's response will be before it's stated probably has its origins not
> in the netherworld, but right there in the highly active corpus
> callosum of the female brain. What's more, males tend to have more
> concentrated activity on the left side of the brain (thus the term
> "left-brained") and less interaction between the right and left sides,
> while women have greater access to both sides.
>
> Where is the seat of mathematical ability? you might wonder. Ahem, it's
> in the left side of the brain. And like it or not, that brings us back
> to Summers' inopportune comment that men do better at the high end of
> the sciences because of a "different availability of aptitude at the
> high end."
>
> The average IQ scores of females and males are equal because IQ tests
> are designed to purposely eliminate sex biases in the scores. But
> looking deeper, one finds that females and males score differently on
> separate parts of the test. Men do better on spatial questions, women
> on reading and other verbal skills.
>
> While some argue that this is a result of conditioning -- when girls
> take up throwing a ball, their spatial ability increases by leaps and
> bounds -- conditioning doesn't explain why males' IQ scores are more
> variable than females'. More males than females end up at the low end
> of the IQ scale, and not surprisingly, relative to females, there are
> more male high school dropouts and more men in prison. But the opposite
> is also true: More males than females have extremely high IQs. And like
> it or not (I don't like it), this is probably why the world has more
> male geniuses à la Einstein, Mozart and Michelangelo. We can thank the
> goddess Nike for Marie Curie, but where's another woman in our
> pantheon?
>
> Oddly enough, those who argue against the existence of gender
> differences in ability are likely to fervently believe that biology,
> and not one's mother, determines homosexuality; demand same-sex medical
> trials; and adhere to the theory that, indeed, women are more collegial
> than men when they make decisions.
>
> Despite the biology, environment, of course, is critical in shaping who
> we become. The numbers of women pursuing careers in the sciences has
> skyrocketed in the last couple of decades. At the prestigious
> Massachusetts Institute of Technology nearly half the student body is
> female. And at medical schools nearly a third of the students are
> women, while at law schools half are female.
>
> Yes, women can do the math. A new way of thinking about male and female
> abilities, beginning in the '60s, has opened all kinds of doors. But we
> are talking about the great mass of people, the averages, here -- not
> the dim boys who drop out of school or the geniuses who devise a new
> theorem or discover a new element.
>
> There's still a great deal we don't know about what is ingrained and
> what is instilled, but acting as if the differences between the sexes
> are purely anatomical, or merely the product of our environment, does
> not serve us well. Ignore the differences, and we forfeit the
> opportunity to encourage and enhance the talents of all of us, from the
> ordinary student to the truly gifted, regardless of sex.
>
> When mathematically talented 12- and 14-year-olds took the SAT in 1980,
> the journal Science reported, the ratio of males to females who scored
> over 700 (out of a possible 800) was 13-to-1. Now the ratio is only
> 2.8-to-1, a clear sign of progress. What we have to do is continue to
> make sure that that "one" is nurtured to succeed in whatever she wants
> to do -- whether it is to be our next Madame Curie or not.
>


Given the above load of 8765, I could not resist
posting this little gem:


+++++++++
The Ladies Who Lie
Peter Allen
Daily Mail (4/12/2003) p. 19.

LITTLE white lies are part of everyday life and
women are no less susceptible than men to
twisting the truth.
It can help with everything from avoiding
unwanted dates to appearing delighted with an
unwanted Christmas present.
But it appears that dishonesty runs much deeper
among British females, with a study finding that
94 per cent lie regularly.
Only six per cent of the 5,000 women questioned
claimed solely to tell the truth.
An astonishing three quarters admitted to
telling a 'big life changing lie', such as
pretending to be on the Pill.
Almost half of those who took part In the
National Scruples and Lies quiz also said that
if they became pregnant through an affair they
might tell their steady partner the child was his.
Common admissions include faking an orgasm - 48
per cent admitted doing this - and letting on
that they weigh less than they do (51 per cent).
A startling 88 per cent admitted feigning
delight at Christmas presents, while 60 per cent
had called in sick because of a hangover.
Other seasonal lies include blaming the postman
for a 'missing' Christmas card (51 per cent),
and passing unwanted presents on to other people
(62 per cent).
A third exaggerate their salaries or lie about
their backgrounds.
The survey also revealed that 50 per cent of
women will take an unofficial day off in
December for last-minute shopping.
Most women 'don't feel bad at all' about their
white lies, the survey says.
'Women lie because they're afraid to tell the
truth,' said psychologist Susan Guilliam.
'They're scared of hurting people, scared of
failing and of being criticised. Women are
expected to fulfil expectations, and to get what
they want in life they feel they have to gloss
over the truth.'
A quarter of those questioned said they would
flirt with their boss at the office Christmas
party to get on.
But Mrs Guilliam warned: 'The sort of moral code
women now follow could lead to disaster the
backlash on behaviour like sleeping with the
boss will be huge.'
The average age of the respondents for the quiz,
commissioned by That's Life! magazine, was 38.
Its editor, Jo Checkley, said: 'Women find it a
struggle to get through the day without telling
little white lies, but much of it is down to
political correctness.
'Just imagine the consequences if women always
told the truth. They would say things Like,
"Yes, you do look fat in that dress"; "The bus
wasn't late, I just couldn't be bothered to get
out of bed"; "You're the worst lover I've ever
had"; or "I'm not listening to you because you
bore me to death".
'You wouldn't have a friend left in the world.
'But British scruples do seem to be going down
the plughole and women no longer seem to have a
clear-cut idea of what is normal.'

+++++++++++++

So 95% of the bitches are LIARS and 75% are
prepared to tell serious life-changing LIES.

A female who makes a rape allegation should be
chucked out the F&^%ing door without hesitation.

Where is the basis for taking females seriously.

Dustbin.



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/3/05 1:38:44 AM ---