Comments

Ddiscrimination in the Corporate world begins within a school of thought. This school of thought (for the sake of the augument is within HBS ), therefore the presiding president of the office is to be tasked for such a credo of thoughts. In this world it is pretty much simple.. server those above you , rules those below you. Thus, this becomes the hypthesis of Business Mangament. In a very sutble --but most powerfull manner , the agenda of the "old boys school" is ever blomming within these schools of thoughts, and will continue !!

Nonetheless, a resignation of a senior person (president) will not resolve the issue. The DNA strands of the thought processes need to be disected, such that the objective and subjective nature of the issues are cleary articulated by all effected parties..

However, as a guy.. I have learnt--women have the last word and anything said after that begins a new argument.. so its time for a bigger bunch of Corporate MCP's to also get some handle and understand thiS !!

Posted by /pd at March 4, 2005 5:33 PM

Harvard is BORING AND OLD NEWS - BRING ON THE NEW NEWS!

Maybe Tom should be boycotted since he agrees that in relationships ...."men will never get it" - a PINK STATE vote for Tom.

Posted by Ted at March 4, 2005 6:12 PM

Thanks for the reference to supplying the Harvard TRANSCRIPT - AGREE WITH TED - this is a boring story.

There are many LARRY comments ONLY AS A FUNCTION OF LEAVING IT on Tom's website [in a prominent position] for so long - that is the only noteworthy dynamic here - that and Seth's comment.

Posted by Brad at March 4, 2005 6:18 PM

LIKE ANYBODY BELIEVES TIME WARNER MAGAZINE OR THE NY TIMES for that matter - the PINK state dwellers have a slow learning curve.

Posted by John at March 4, 2005 7:13 PM

I think Ted, Brad and John should be "man" enough to use his (since it's the same person) real name or a consistant pseudo.

Posted by Kirk Samuels at March 4, 2005 8:09 PM

This isn't a question of whether there are or are not 'innate differences' between men and women that might affect ability in science and engineering. Anyone who claims that that question has been conclusively answered is probably lying. Men have an XY chromosome pair, women have an XX - and on those chromosomes are genes that affect all sorts of things. That may or may not include differences in learning ability, thinking styles, and strengths and weaknesses at various kinds of tasks. I don't know. Summers doesn't know, and I don't think anyone else knows - genetics is a fairly new field, and there's a lot of work to do.

Does anyone else see the problem here? The people reacting to Summers' comments in this way as basically saying "Hey, you can't consider that possibility. It's off limits. It conflicts with our ideology, with what we want to be true, so you'd better not even mention it. And for goodness sakes, you'd better not do any scientific research that might give support to it!"

I for one don't see how promoting scientific research is going to "rejuvenate old myths and reinforce negative stereotypes and biases". If this 'innate differences' speculation is wrong, research would only serve to show that these old myths are unfounded. That's a good thing, right?

Posted by AbercrombieChick at March 5, 2005 1:47 AM

This whole deal stinks like a purple cow.

Hey, if nothing else, I think Summer's stunt has been effective. I may not buy it, but clearly a lot of people are deeply affected. He's garnered a lot of attention in no time flat.

I just can't help but wonder how meaningful it will be? Is he going to back up his claim of igniting provocative research or was he just trying to bolster his numbers and up the wattage on his spotlight?

Posted by Jason Kerr at March 5, 2005 4:36 AM

Kirk - nice try at sensoring - typical lazy low-IQ slant on blogging - you probably want big brother in our homes also.

Posted by John at March 5, 2005 9:58 AM

Larry? Who cares? Muchadoaboutnothing.

Posted by Randy at March 5, 2005 10:57 AM

LINDA TRIES TO MAKE SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING = that is the real story here.

Posted by Mary at March 5, 2005 1:25 PM

Mary, Ted, Brad, John, or whoever you are:
For some one, or multple someones, you seem to be the one/s making much ado about this comment given your multiple posts under multiple false identities. This is not about seeking the overview of Big Brother (as you accuse Kirk of doing). It is instead about seeking honest dialogue and thoughtful commentary. And, by the way, if your real name is 'Mary' I would think that this story would be of particular interest to you.

Posted by Pam Brill at March 6, 2005 1:58 AM

Honest and thoughtful is genuine and for you to try to elevate yourself a class above fails Pam.

Posted by Mary at March 6, 2005 8:09 AM

This is really a privacy issue - with Choicepoint, Bank of America, thieves, et. al. stealing ID's - more and more any measure of extra privacy is becoming paramount - especially online.

Posted by John at March 6, 2005 8:40 AM

What just happened??? What had been a really intriguing debate with smart people on both sides has deteriorated to name-calling. I'll be darned if I can even figure out what "Pink State" is supposed to mean, exactly, but it's clearly intended as an insult. Never thought I'd see that here.

Here's a thought: think it's boring? Don't bother reading or posting about it. If you're right, it will die a natural death due to lack of interest, and your silence will have helped it along. And if you're wrong, at least you won't be provoked into posting your thoughts under a transparent pseudonym to reduce the apparently considerable risk of your credit card info being captured from a blog by the Identity Thieves.

Seriously, if you have a heartfelt opinion other than "it's boring" - please, please participate fully in the conversation. Hearing other, thoughtfully considered perspectives makes us all smarter, even if we don't always agree.

Posted by Jennifer Warwick at March 6, 2005 6:04 PM

I think Mr. Peters has gotten a little overzealous in his promotion of women, it's bordering on patronization. Obviously there ARE differences between the sexes. Is that bad? Mr. Summers isn't saying that women can't be scientists or engineers, just that there are porportionately less represented. Everyone just relax, we'll see if he's right or wrong as studies progress. In the mean time let's not villify a man for having an opinion.

Posted by Brian Wood at March 6, 2005 9:34 PM

Hi Brian I hear what you say ...

BUT ...

In every Tom Peters lecture I have heard for the last few years - and in everything he writes Tom makes the point he is not on some sort of 'social crusade' for women. He is merely telling it as it really is.

As he puts it - he cannot stand

"Disgusting exhibitions of grotesque stupidity"

For instance when marketing, sales, finance and management people simply don't 'get it' and completely misunderstand the growing importance of the role of women. Amen to that I say!!

As I have said in previous postings - women are just better at the relationship stuff then us guys. End of story!

It really is as simple as that - there is absolutely no need to prove this scientifically for god sake - we all know it is true beyond doubt!!

Trevor

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 7, 2005 6:28 AM

"FACE IT WOMEN ARE LOUSY AT SCIENCE" - TOM'S POLL at this website proves it - the votes are in - maybe a special Dr. Phil show for the science/math phobia.

Posted by John at March 7, 2005 7:51 AM

buy viagra without prescription overnight shipping Hey John-Jack-Mike-Mary-Ashton-Brad-Ted,

You seem awfully passionate about this - and about many other threads on this blog. You are often the first to post, no matter the topic. I'm honestly curious about your point of view, though it's hard to get to, since you start every post YELLING IN ALL CAPS. I may be the only one, but I'm fascinated as to what your perspective on these topics really is, and I'm not getting it from mystery names, a bogus address, and cryptic two-line posts calling people "lazy," "slow" and "wusses."

Honestly: what are you really thinking about these issues?

Posted by Jennifer Warwick at March 7, 2005 2:00 PM

Brilliant Jennifer!! - well said

viagra best price uk

Trevor

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 7, 2005 3:11 PM

Hey Trevor,
If it's okay for you to say that "women are just better than men at that relationship stuff," why is it wrong for Mr. Summers to say that men are better than women at math and science?

Posted by Brian at March 8, 2005 12:54 AM

No problem with that either Brian - it is all about opinions

I guess I am less on the rational scientific side and more convinced than ever before the relationship side in the current market place is the most important place to be.

Warm regards

Trevor

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 8, 2005 3:55 AM

Differing opinions are great. Some data supports that women have the right stuff for careers in science, math, engineering.
The Women in Science Project, conducted during the 90s at Dartmouth College, http://www.dartmouth.edu/~wisp/model.html, and similar programs at other colleges have identified factors that have contributed to women steering away from majors and careers in math and science, including engineering. These were not hardwired brain differences but were instead interpersonal and intrapersonal factors, most of them related to socialization. According to Dartmouth's study (and this is old now): "In 1997, 42% of the students graduating with science majors were women. In engineering, 24% of senior majors are women, in advance of the national average of 18%, and an increase from the 15% of engineering majors in 1990."
According to my own homegrown study, things are improving. My oldest daughter is a biomed engineering major, a junior in college who has made the cut--50% of the students who started with her as engines majors have left for majors that tap the other side of the brain. By the way, most of those guys were guys... My second daughter is a neuroscience major, premed freshman in college who is on honour roll with some hardcore science classes. That makes 50% already from this household of four daughters. With the others in high school and middle school, both his scorers in math/science, the stats look to be improving. All four play competitive sports. And they are still great at the relationship piece and all-American women.

This issue is not a matter of Mars-Venus planetary differences, of one gender being supreme to the other. It's about identifying and leveraging strengths in every person in order to sustain planetary success.

Posted by Pam Brill at March 8, 2005 10:57 AM

EUREKA!!! - Men and Women ARE Different!

Happy Valentine's Story! ... I think!

Yesterday on Valentines Day I had the most fantastic example to underline Barbara and Allan Pease wonderful book - 'Why men don't listen and women can't read maps''

My wonderful partner … and wife to be Annie …. decorated the lounge with four huge red balloons yesterday morning to celebrate Valentines day – a fantastic and thoughtful gesture that sums Annie up well.

Although I was working at the PC in the lounge I didn’t notice the balloons for two hours until Annie told me!! – that was after I had not noticed earlier the other two balloons she had tied on to the light pull cord in the bedroom!! – I didn’t notice those two till I went to switch on the light!!!

Annie later showed me the letter received from the local council about some road works that would cause some disruption in our street for a few weeks and I made a comment about the name of the guy writing the letter – his surname was PLANT and it just struck me that was ironic when talking about road works and heavy equipment being in the road!!

Annie said "How come you notice that detail …but didn’t notice 6 huge red balloons!!!"

That is an absolutely true story word for word!! Another example about the difference in men and women.

The great news is … Annie still loves me … she is the most special person in my life ‘cos she knows me so well and always forgives my eccentricities!

We had a great Valentine's day by the way

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 9, 2005 5:28 AM