Where's the female view and does it matter?

[busker]

a mirror image of really genius physicists being mostly male when the advantage in whatever quality or talent causes it being only 20% (for example) better there.

There are too many brilliant women in maths (look at the composition of the IMO teams - 20% girls, 100% East Asian)  now to make this claim, based on the analysis of historical data, tenable as evidence of differences in underlying ability. The ratio still remains overwhelmingly male, but that is also explained by boys being more cool with being 'nerdy' than girls. 
I think brilliance is equally distributed amongst the sexes, but men are more competitive by nature, and more of them succeed in the current competition driven paradigm. That's an outcome of the design of the system, not an innate quality of men or women.

Brilliant women are like brilliant men. The communists realised this decades ago. The whole attraction thing is nonsense and needs to be stamped out.

[wasellajam]

This thread reminded me to use gender neutral pronouns when talking about a user's poems.

It's interesting that any research people dug up is old enough to probably not apply to to the net today. My little dig bought up mostly paid workshops.

Quix! you voted for knowing but then didn't spill. We'll wait.

[dukealien]

a mirror image of really genius physicists being mostly male when the advantage in whatever quality or talent causes it being only 20% (for example) better there.

There are too many brilliant women in maths (look at the composition of the IMO teams - 20% girls, 100% East Asian)  now to make this claim, based on the analysis of historical data, tenable as evidence of differences in underlying ability. The ratio still remains overwhelmingly male, but that is also explained by boys being more cool with being 'nerdy' than girls. 
I think brilliance is equally distributed amongst the sexes, but men are more competitive by nature, and more of them succeed in the current competition driven paradigm. That's an outcome of the design of the system, not an innate quality of men or women.

Brilliant women are like brilliant men. The communists realised this decades ago. The whole attraction thing is nonsense and needs to be stamped out.

We must beware of ideology, though.  If you start from an assumption that, basically, men and women are alike, there's a tendency to then assign any apparent differences to social causes.  Which would make the assumption untestable, hence unscientific.  Whereas if you start from the hypothesis that there *might* be differences, you might learn something.  Even if the hypothesis is annoying, it's at least testable.