Cyril's Gleans

Bob's review of "The Mathematics of Sex"

The review of The Mathematics of Sex: How Biology and Society Conspire to Limit Talented Women and Girls by Stephen J. Ceci and Wendy M. Williams (http://www.amazon.com/Mathematics-Sex-Biology-Conspire-Talented/dp/0195389395/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1277858346&sr=1-1) follows.

Three brief reviews of the book might be worth reading to get oriented: Feminist Review: The Mathematics of Sex: How Biology and Society ... (http://feministreview.blogspot.com/2010/01/mathematics-of-sex-how-biology-and.html - and read the one comment); and the two on Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Mathematics-Sex-Biology-Conspire-Talented/product-reviews/0195389395/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1 (the three comments here are useless).

The book is by a husband and wife team, both in tenured positions at Cornell - an alternate title for the book might well be "Why are there so few tenured women teaching tertiary STEM* courses?". They have three daughters who are mentioned a number of times in the book - author bios are part of the book.

[* STEM stands for "Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics". It is a widely used acronym and is used frequently in the book under review. Nowhere in the book, nor on the Net, could I find the difference between technology and engineering. Courses requiring a fair amount of mathematics are lumped together in the STEM bucket (as noted above, the book is largely about university courses, students, and instructors). In one place in the book the authors list the STEM fields in which they are interested as mathematics, physics, engineering, chemistry, operations research, economics, accounting, materials science, and computer science. Only physics, engineering, and computer science are discussed apart from lists and tables.]

The book states "This book is about the reasons males are overrepresented in mathematics and mathematically intensive scientific professions such as physics, computer science, chemistry, operations research, mathematics, and engineering." Apart from lists and graphs, the only fields discussed in any detail are mathematics, physics, and computer science.

Two interesting sets of statistics are provided (cf. the comment on the review in "The Feminist Review"): one on the dust jacket, one on page 104 of the book. The one on the dust jacket reads "Nearly half of all physicians and biologists are females as are the majority of new psychologists, veterinarians, and dentists, suggesting that women have achieved equality with men in the workforce. But the ranks of professionals in math-intensive careers remains lopsidedly males; up to 93% of tenure-track academic positions in some of the most mathematically-oriented fields are held by men."

The one on page 104 reads "48% of college teachers in nonscience fields are men; 57% of college psychology teachers are men; 74% of college biological science teachers are men; 71% of college social science teachers (summed across economists, sociologist, anthropologists, and political scientists) are men; 83% of college math teachers are men; 84% of college physical science teachers (summed across chemistry, physics, astronomy, and earth sciences) are men; 86% of college computer science teachers are men, and 93% of college engineering teachers are men."

The book cites Survey of Doctorate Recipients - The SDR is a survey of 40000 science and engineering doctorate ... Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics. ... of Doctoral Scientists and Engineers in the United States: 2001, NSF 03-310(http://www.norc.org/projects/survey+of+doctorate+recipients.htm) ... as the source of the stats quoted - feel free to verify

The book looks at the pros and cons of the usual three explanations: innate ability, social and cultural biases, and personal preferences. It concludes that it is a big problem, things are not going to change much any time soon, and that more research is needed.

The book is disappointing - but it does make one think. Misc. comments follow:

- the book is concerned with teaching and learning, not doing - there is no discussion of crafts, manual dexterity, visual and auditory acuity, etc.

- there is no mention of visual thinking vs. symbolic thinking

- there is no mention or discussion of real physicists, mathematicians, et al. - all discussion is of studies that produced numbers

- the authors are obsessed with paper and pencil tests - they apparently really believe in the validity of IQ and aptitude testing and love J. R. Flynn (Flynn effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect ) who claims to show that IQs have been rising over the last fifty years. This is accpeted on faith and readily available counter studies are not cited

- there is no discussion of the womb environment or of birth trauma although numerous relevant studies exist

- Math 55 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - Math 55 is a two-semester long first-year undergraduate mathematics course at Harvard University. The official titles of the two courses are Honors Abstract (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Math_55) ... is discussed on the first page of the preface - it says there is an attrition rate of over 50% - one class was stated as ending at 21 students: 45 percent Jewish, 18 percent Asian, 100 percent male.

William Lowell Putnam Mathematical Competition - Wikipedia, the ... - The William Lowell Putnam Mathematical Competition, often abbreviated to the Putnam Competition, is an annual mathematics competition for undergraduate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lowell_Putnam_Mathematical_Competition) ... on the second page of the preface, the book states that, in the past decade, of 51 Putnam Fellows 48 were male.

The book mentions the Fields Medal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - The Fields Medal is a prize awarded to two, three, or four mathematicians not over 40 years of age at each International Congress of the International ...Conditions of the award - Fields Medalists - Landmarks - The medal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fields_Medal) - but does not discuss - to the best of Bob's knowledge all Fields Medalists to date have been male

Bob likes Thomas Moore

The Harp That Once Through Tara's Halls

The harp that once through Tara's halls
The soul of music shed,
Now hangs as mute on Tara's walls,
As if that soul were fled. --
So sleeps the pride of former days,
So glory's thrill is o'er,
And hearts, that once beat high for praise,
Now feel that pulse no more.

No more to chiefs and ladies bright
The harp of Tara swells;
The chord alone, that breaks at night,
Its tale of ruin tells.
Thus Freedom now so seldom wakes,
The only throb she gives,
Is when some heart indignant breaks,
To show that still she lives.

Thomas Moore

Bob's favorite books (6) about the U.S. Army's Sepcial Forces

Two of the books listed are fiction, four non-fiction. Two of the non-fiction books and one of the novels are by women.

Novels:
- The Originals by Doris C. Baker (1st edition 2002, revised edition 2010)
- Crossfire by J. C. Pollock (1st edition 1985, most recent reissue 1992)

Non-fiction:
- The Company They Keep: Life Inside the U. S. Army Special Forces by Anna J. Simmons (1st edition 1997, most recent reissue 1998)
- Masters of Chaos: The Secret History of the Special Forces by Linda Robinson (1st edition 2004, most recent reissue 2005)
- Chosen Soldier: The Making of a Special Forces Warrior by Dick Couch (1st edition 2007, most recent reissue 2008)
- The Mission, the Men, and Me: Lessons from a Former Delta Force Commander by Pete Blaber (1st edition 2008, reissue due in 2010)