SoylentNews

Girls vs Boys in STEM and non-STEM

posted by martyb on Monday December 10 2018, @01:33AM   
from the unexpected-causes dept.

hendrikboom writes:

In a landmark study involving over a million students, it appears that the reason boys dominate girls in STEM fields is not that they are better than girls at it (the reverse seems to be true) but, perversely, that gender differences are lower in non-STEM fields.

About the STEM grades, which are often abused as an explanation:

A classroom with more variable grades indicates a bigger gap between high and low performing students, and greater male variability could result in boys outnumbering girls at the top and bottom of the class.

“Greater male variability is an old idea that people have used to claim that there will always be more male geniuses – and fools – in society,” O’Dea says.

The team found that on average, girls’ grades were higher than boys’, and girls’ grades were less variable than boys’.

But girls' and boys' variability were much closer in non-STEM fields.

---

Original Submission

• Re:Another gut-punch to bigotsRe:Another gut-punch to bigots (Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @02:07AM (4 children)

  by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @02:07AM (#772197)

  Petersonites

  So, it is a fly-blown cult now, eh? Petersons are only interested in money. And if that involves insighting a bunch of incels, he has no problem with that. So pass the all-beef dinner, if you don't mind.

  Parent

  Starting Score:	0		points
  Moderation		0
  Troll=1, Informative=1, Total=2
  Extra 'Troll' Modifier		0
  Total Score:		0

• Re:Another gut-punch to bigotsRe:Another gut-punch to bigots (Score: 1, Informative) by idiot_king on Monday December 10 2018, @02:27AM (1 child)

  by idiot_king (6587) on Monday December 10 2018, @02:27AM (#772201)

  It's not just them, but in my experience they're the ones most explicit about it. Regular ol' classic sexism is implicit about it.
  "Oh you're a woman? Let me take care of that." With that being some task which said woman is completely qualified for.
  I'm starting to call these Petersonites, Dawkinites et al "neo-bigots" because they're bigots except actually honest about their bigotry and emboldened by their conception of "free speech" and "the marketplace of ideas" and whatever other garbage they tout as being superior.

  Parent

  • Re:Another gut-punch to bigots(Score: 2) by EventH0rizon on Wednesday December 12 2018, @05:34AM

    by EventH0rizon (936) on Wednesday December 12 2018, @05:34AM (#773322) Journal

    To be clear, are you really labeling Peterson and Dawkins as "bigots"?

    Bigot:

    https://www.dictionary.com/browse/bigot [dictionary.com]
    "a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion."

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot [merriam-webster.com]
    "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance"

    Parent

• Re:Another gut-punch to bigotsRe:Another gut-punch to bigots (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @08:01AM (1 child)

  by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @08:01AM (#772273)

  You name it, then you wonder if it has reached the status of naming, then you shame it. Then you call yourself liberal.

  Parent

  • Re:Another gut-punch to bigots(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @08:27PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @08:27PM (#772540)

    Fucking Nazis!

    Parent