the sound of one voice discussing

Dear John Tierney,

I have some thoughts on today's column. Declaring something when you have the page of newsprint all to yourself does not constitute a "discussion." That's you stating something publicly. People who disagree with you and do not happen to have their own paper-of-record column (or Ivy League Oval Office) must resort to other means in order to refute your false or (more often) half-cocked statements. I know, it's really hard when you think you're just bringing something to "the debate" and people get all yelly and angry, but guess what? IT'S NOT A DEBATE UNLESS IT'S A FUCKING DEBATE.

I don't know why we have to be subjected time and time again to the proclamations of dudes who don't even seem to know the definition of the word "debate" or "discussion" in the first place, but whatevsies.

Right now, I'm not going to argue that women are good enough at math and science to have greater representation in those fields and professions than we already have, although I believe that to be the important core truth of this whole argument. For some reason, the "debate" gets skewed by Summers and Tierney into being about elite positions at top research universities. I just don't think that's super relevant to how many, say, software engineers should, statistically, be women, if parity within the field based on individual potential and ability were achieved.

But I will argue with the way these dudes argue. See, I'm a student of women's studies. The kind of critical thinking that emerges from women's studies and critical theory and cultural studies makes people like me more likely to see flaws in controversial statements about gender (or race, or culture). Summers favored classics and econ over women's studies and Africana studies. Why? I think it's because he likes solid conclusions and formulas; he enjoys the safety and comfort of believing that social inequalities are, at least in some cases, based on fundamental FACTS.

See, dudes like Summers and Tierny believe they have the FACTS and that others who wish those FACTS weren't true are hell-bent on dismissing them, or at least muddying the waters with all our wacky "deconstructions." Eugenicists had some lovely science too, which to them seemed rock-solid. It turns out a real debate is about thinking critically on all levels in order to avoid the types of false conclusions that actually come from our social bias. Unfortunately, there's a lot to consider. It's hard. It makes coming comfortably to conclusions like "men are better at math" much HARDER, because it requires that terms be defined, statistics be questioned, and motives for making such statements of FACT be examined. However, when people like me say, "Hang on, that argument is full of holes," then we're squelching academic freedom, we're demanding people not state FACTS if those FACTS are not politically correct! Taboo! Tabooooo!!!

Maybe that's how it seems if you don't really get it. But for those of us who do, it's not about dismissing valid research or silencing debate in the name of PC bullshit. It's about examining the nature of facts, research, science, and society.

Here's a gem from Tierney's column:

Would it be safe during the “interactive discussions” for someone to mention the new evidence supporting Dr. Summers’s controversial hypothesis about differences in the sexes’ aptitude for math and science?

Well, it depends on your definition of "safe," dude. Would rocks be thrown? I hope not. But would the methods of this research be questioned? Yeah. Would the relevance of it to the overall goal of increasing female participation in math and science be questioned? Sure. Will people with passion and brains argue fiercely against harmful and biased conclusions? Fuck yes dude. Get ready for an actual discussion.

Or, you know, just bravely defend the FACTS that happen to support the dominant position of members of your own social group against the horrible tyranny of those of us who dare to criticize and argue. And knock yourself out with some more one-man "discussions."