Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site mhuxr.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mfs
From: mfs@mhuxr.UUCP (Damballah Wedo)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.sci
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Why are there so few [female|black] physicists?
Message-ID: <631@mhuxr.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 16-Jul-86 12:23:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: mhuxr.631
Posted: Wed Jul 16 12:23:05 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 17-Jul-86 07:16:35 EDT
References: <1970@brl-smoke.ARPA> <320@rtech.UUCP> <2064@brl-smoke.ARPA> <145@sbcs.UUCP> <2213@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Organization: The Poto Mitan in the Houmfor
Lines: 30
Xref: watmath net.women:11367 net.sci:1272

> Doug Gwyn:
> I don't know for sure, but I also suspect that a natural balance would
> find a different percentage of dark-skinned races employed in outdoor
> labor than exists in the population as a whole.

Why?

> There does seem to be a natural difference in average strength, and
> women float better than men due to the subcutaneous layer of fat, etc.
> Some professions may naturally favor certain characteristics such as
> these.

The examples you cite are based on physical differences, which have little
to do with the distribution of females in technical/scientific professions,
which are in turn the topic of discussion, I believe. So why are your examples
relevant?

> It is obvious to anyone who has watched children develop that not all
> individuals are created equal.  There is much other evidence of this
> too.  You may indeed prefer to believe otherwise, but that doesn't
> change reality.

There is much evidence that shows girls have equal ability to solve abstract
problems, and that ability diminishes because they discouraged from exercising
it. That is reality too, even if *you* prefer to believe otherwise.
-- 
Marcel-Franck Simon		ihnp4!{mhuxr, hl3b5b}!mfs

	" Ayiti cheri, pi bon payi pase' ou nan poin "
	" Fok moin te' kite'-ou, pou moin te kapab konpran vale`-ou "