bashoGWSS1

What I really wondered about while reading what Lawrence Summers and his ideas about gender roles and how they dictate a man or woman's place in society was this: why are these studies done in the first place? At best, if no concrete evidence is found that links a person's sex to their intelligence, it is a waste of time and resources to do so. At worst, as was expressed by Bublick and Fausto-Sterling, even the slightest correlation can be grossly misused by someone who is hell-bent on finding proof of their sexist convictions. This 'evidence' can and has been used to pigeon hole men and women, specifically boys and girls into roles that don't best suit their abilities.

Both Bublick and Fausto-Sterling give extensive examples of some of the flaws in Summers' argument, but in the interest of making an objective argument, and explain counter examples as well as the errors in many of the assumptions he makes. However, I was disappointed that they did not address the effects that this way of thinking actually have on society (perhaps they did in other works) and why making vast generalizations about segments of society can be harmful. After all, it seems to me that this concern is what motivates them to pour their efforts into making a counterpoint to Summers' statements.