Gay black Republicans are hard to find. There are various explanations for their scarcity. American women in engineering disciplines are also rare. Since I attended my first engineering class as an undergraduate four years ago, I have wondered why the guy-to-girl ratio is 5-to-1 at best.
Fortunately for me, Dr. Lawrence Summers, the president of Harvard University, was equally curious about the imbalance. In a session aimed at discussing the progress of women in academia organized by the National Bureau of Economic Research, Summers said, "I am here to provoke you," while raising the issue of too few women in the sciences -- faculty as well as students.
Summers succeeded beyond his wildest imagination.
In a poorly worded speech, he referred to some innate differences between men and women that make it difficult for women to excel in engineering disciplines. He also contended women find it hard to manage an 80-hour workweek. Just when you thought Summers could not get any hotter, he cited research that suggested young boys far outperform girls in standardized math exams.
MIT biology professor Nancy Hopkins walked out in the middle of the speech. Summers has since issued at least three apologies, including one directly to the Harvard community. His office has declined to release the transcript of the speech, much to the glee of media thirsting for controversy. I called his office to request a copy and was promptly, but politely, turned down.
The clamor that followed Summers' ill-fated assessment seems to be distracting people from the real issue. Barring the poor choice of words, Summers actually made some important points in his speech. For years, the number of female students in engineering disciplines has been woefully low. A provocative discussion on why this is the case is long overdue.
In our politically correct society, however, the hoi polloi enjoys attacking Summers more than actually fixing the problem. I am not defending Summers, but he might be on to something when he says the differences between men and women have something to do with what degree programs they choose.
The women who are criticizing Summers would not have been so livid had he lauded the special skills that women bring to the table. The hypocrisy police need to lie low and look in the mirror.
I spoke to some of my female friends pursuing engineering degrees regarding this issue, finding diverse reactions. Jessica Stape, president of Women in Computer Science at ASU and a computer systems junior, blamed the lack of outreach toward women as the main reason for the low numbers. She also felt U.S. high schools don't always do a good job of teaching math and other sciences.
Courtney Hofmann, computer science senior from Madison, Wisc., suggested a more cultural aspect at play. She said women had very few engineering role models. Young girls are raised in a way that they are more likely to seek inspiration from Barbara Walters than Carly Fiorina. Most striking was her comment that society treats a woman's career as a secondary aspect of her life -- the primary aspect being the role to support and nurture relationships as a girlfriend or wife.
The differences between men and women are not innate, as Summers incorrectly suggested. The differences are a small part of how we view each other. In the depths of our minds, most of us have a rigid worldview of how things ought to be.
We are more prepared for a female-dominated literature class than a math class where half the students are women. Even if we assume Summers is the biggest misogynist in the universe, he has spoken what many of us unknowingly believe but are too coy to admit.
In a society hostile to nuance and dissent, such controversies are met with knee-jerk reactions rather than long-term solutions. Summers is busy touting $25 million in new funds to avoid budget constraints on the appointment of women and minorities at Harvard. The media is busy creating a pattern of past controversial comments Summers might have made. We really need to think along the lines of what Stape and Hofmann have specified as hindrances women face in their careers.
This is not the first controversy of its kind. When American symphony orchestras introduced blind auditions in the 1970s -- where the musician plays behind a screen so gender is invisible to listeners -- the number of women offered jobs in professional orchestras increased.
The issue at hand is more complex, and we need to unravel some screens to get a clearer picture rather than put women behind them. The Summers controversy gives us the opportunity to have a dialogue we are supposed to treasure but have come to revile.
Nishant Bhajaria is a computer science graduate student. Reach him at nishant.bhajaria@asu.edu.
