Well, duh....

It doesn't take a rocket scientist -- but clearly eludes a feminista -- to figure this out:

Harvard University president Lawrence Summers has suffered acrimonious condemnation, and may have jeopardized his job, for suggesting that the underrepresentation of women in engineering and some scientific fields may be due in part to inherent differences in the intellectual abilities of the sexes. But Summers could be right. Some scholars who are in the know about the differences between mens' and womens' brains believe his remarks have merit. 'Among people who do the research, it's not so controversial. There are lots and lots of studies that show that mens' and womens' brains are different,' says Richard J. Haier, a professor of psychology in the pediatrics department of the University of California Los Angeles medical school. *** In recent years, scientists have found that male and female brains are wired differently from one another, due to the role of testosterone and other male hormones during gestation. Brains growing under the influence of male hormones are slightly larger and have denser concentrations of neurons in some regions. Male brains also contain a greater proportion of gray matter, the part of the brain responsible for computation, while women have relatively more white matter, which specializes in making connections between brain cells. Brain-imaging studies suggest that both sexes exploit these differences to their benefit. UCLA researchers have done brain scans of men and women who scored in the top 1 percent on the math section of the SAT. As they worked on math problems, the men relied heavily on the grey matter in the brain's parietal and cerebral cortices. Women showed greater activity in areas dominated by the well-connected white matter. "Maybe they're doing the math using the white matter," Haier says. "It's not completely unreasonable." *** Intelligence tests have found that men, on average, perform better on spatial tasks that require mentally rotating or otherwise manipulating objects. Men also do better on tests of mathematical reasoning. Women tend to do better than men on tasks requiring verbal memory and distinguishing whether objects are similar or different. The relative strengths even out, so on average the sexes are of equal intelligence. Some studies also have suggested that the IQ distribution is more spread out among men. If that is true, then there are proportionately more men at the extremely brilliant end of the IQ scale — and the dull end as well. So the reasoning goes like this: Fields such as physics require superb mathematical ability. Not just above average, but really out there. If men do have a slight advantage over women in mathematical ability, as much of the current research suggests, and there are more men at the extreme ends of the intelligence spectrum, that suggests there is a larger pool of men who can do the heavy intellectual lifting physics requires. *** Intelligence tests have found that men, on average, perform better on spatial tasks that require mentally rotating or otherwise manipulating objects. Men also do better on tests of mathematical reasoning. Women tend to do better than men on tasks requiring verbal memory and distinguishing whether objects are similar or different. The relative strengths even out, so on average the sexes are of equal intelligence. Some studies also have suggested that the IQ distribution is more spread out among men. If that is true, then there are proportionately more men at the extremely brilliant end of the IQ scale — and the dull end as well. So the reasoning goes like this: Fields such as physics require superb mathematical ability. Not just above average, but really out there. If men do have a slight advantage over women in mathematical ability, as much of the current research suggests, and there are more men at the extreme ends of the intelligence spectrum, that suggests there is a larger pool of men who can do the heavy intellectual lifting physics requires.

It's just staggering that Summers should be so viciously attacked, not only for stating the obvious, but for seeking further inquiry into a matter that has already been the subject of much research -- and research that tends to support Summers' ruminations. It certainly suggests that those gullible parents who are currently spending up to $40,000 a year to keep their kids at Harvard are not getting their money's worth. (And I don't even want to think about all of us taxpayers who are funding whatever de minimus research the P.C. vultures allow to be performed at Harvard, courtesy of government grants.)