Posted by
JDComments on Monday, July 10, 2006 1:42:41 PM
I was reading an article about recent experiments at UCLA which had determined that male and female mice display significant differences at the most basic molecular genetic levels in almost all their major organs, including the brain, a finding that the researchers felt probably is applicable to humans as well [there is probably something worth writing about the close relationship between rodents and humans, but I will leave that for someone else] and it occurred to me that maybe, just maybe, Lawrence Summer, the ex-president of Harvard, and object of scorn and ridicule because he had the temerity to suggest that perhaps men and women had different aptitudes for math and science, may be feeling a little vindication today. After having been essentially run out of Boston by the liberal faculty and Feminists, based on their dogmatic beliefs in the equality of the sexes in all matters [well not all matters. They have no problem proclaiming the fact that women are more nurturing, caring, non confrontational, yada, yada yada....but that is all good stuff, so its ok!], that foundation of liberalism [at least when it suits them] Science, comes forth and says that men and women are different! Wow, what a shock. Of course, the fact that genes work differently in the genders will be glossed over as a minimal aberration by the Liberals, not really affecting the important stuff, but the point is, for the party of Darwin and natural selection, this should be a very troubling development indeed. I always felt that Summer's comment was worth considering as a possibility, which is how he framed it, but the Left jumped all over him for daring to disparage an article of faith for them: Women have to be, they just HAVE to be, equal to men. I mean, that is a basic tenet of Political Correctness. But on what is it based? If you look at the historical record, men have obviously been the leaders in science and math through all cultures and civilizations. Liberals will say that is just a reflection of cultural bias, and that maybe true, but the better question maybe why cultures developed that bias. Could it possibly be because men were better at all this stuff? Now, hard, biochemical science comes forth to announce basic, physiological differences in the sexes. Will this shake the faith, and there is no other word for it, of the Liberals? I really doubt it. But what this should do is make obvious that their beliefs are as faith based as a religious conservatives, as much as they like to present themselves as the party of reason, rationality and science. And like all articles of faith, others do not have to agree with them, and they should not be tarred and feathered if they don't, nor forced out of the presidency of a University. But the high Priests of Political Correctness will never see it that way.