To the editor:

 Uncategorized
Mar 212005
 
Authors:

There was an opinion article published on March 10 about Harvard President Lawrence Summers' comment on why women are outnumbered by men in high-ranking science positions. The writer, Jesse McLain, supported her hypothesis that women simply don't want these jobs (they think differently and want different things than men).

What is bothersome about this is how can anyone suppose that the male and female brains work differently unless we are treated the exact same way and then compared?

This NEVER happens in today's world. It is impossible to determine what amount of difference is due to socialization and what is due to biological differences. McLain states that this opinion "seems far less based in scientific study and more based in equality fanatics who want all differences ignored."

As a self-proclaimed equality fanatic, I can say I have looked at the research and it overwhelmingly supports similarity, rather than differences, among the brain anatomy and function of men and women. The differences that are found are minimal and can be lessened or dissolved completely by simply altering the environment and situation. That said, it seems to me Summers was, in fact, very much out of line. I would expect someone as influentially positioned as him to do his research and not make ignorant comments that encourage the differential and unequal treatment of men and women. It sounds like McLain could do some research herself.

Laura Lovato

Junior

Psychology Major

 Posted by at 6:00 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

To the editor:

 Uncategorized  Add comments
Mar 212005
 
Authors:

I would like to comment on the Terri Schiavo case before people blow this issue out of proportion. This issue extends further than the idea that a person's life is being put in the hands of lawmakers, and it does not include religious beliefs. Many believe this, but what it comes down to is selfishness on the side of Mr. Schiavo. When he married Terri, he said, "till death do us part and in sickness and in health." There were no exceptions to this. If he wants to divorce his impaired wife, then well, why hasn't he? Instead, he wants to marry another woman and literally starve and dehydrate his own wife in order to do so.

Where is the justice in that? I am not condoning divorce, but that is better than the alternative. If Mr. Schiavo is allowed to take his wife's life into his own hands, how many other spouses will do the same? This will open the door to euthanasia and more Dr. Kavorkians. I am asking you all to look beyond what is heard and read in the media, and think about the repercussions of what Mr. Schiavo is suggesting.

Andrea Matich

Senior

Business Marketing Major

 Posted by at 6:00 pm