The September 2008 issue of the Bulletin depicts as “Reminiscent of McCarthyism” the U.S. National Association of Scholars’ plans to identify university programs peddling ideology mas­querading as knowledge. But it is ironic that the same issue of the Bulletin also contains an article justifying NAS concerns. The accumulating evidence not­withstanding, the president’s column — “Women Still Lagging & Losing in Sciences” — insists on portraying the so-called “under-representation” of women in physical sciences and engineering faculty as a consequence of discrimination.

That this persistent pattern cannot be rationally discussed was spectacularly demonstrated by Lawrence Summers’ resignation as president of Harvard Uni­versity, following the brouhaha caused by his merely raising the idea that factors other than discrimination might be considered.

Yet evidence that factors other than discrimination may play a role has been available for decades. To cite just one example, the work of Canadian psych­o­logist and internationally respected Doreen Kimura strongly supports the idea that there are subtle biology-related differences in the cognitive abilities of males and females, with these becoming significant at the high end of ability scales. Furthermore such evidence also suggests that even those women possessing the requisite skills for success in the hard sciences tend to prefer “people-oriented” over “object-oriented” disciplines.

I have observed these patterns in my four decades of involvement with the University of Toronto’s elite engineering science program. Originally an exclusive male preserve, from the 1990s we actively recruited women, and I taught mathematics to many of these very talented individuals. But at the end of the second year, when the students select a specialty program or major, it was obvious women tended to prefer those specialties emphasizing disciplines which could be considered more people-oriented.

Feminist cant appearing in the Bulletin was a factor in my decision to be a sometime member of NAS and to support its Canadian equivalent, the Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship.

Philip A. Sullivan
Professor Emeritus
Institute for Aerospace Studies
University of Toronto

---------------------------------------------------------------
Letters to the Editor
Letters for publication are welcome. Letters should address a specific article, comment, or letter that recently appeared in the paper or be tied to recent events. Letters are limited to 300 words and may be edited for length and clarity. Include your name, address and phone number. Anonymous letters will not be accepted. Submissions that are considered potentially libellous will not be published. We read every letter we receive and every letter gets equal consideration. Publication is at the sole discretion of CAUT. If your letter is accepted for publication, you will be contacted by phone, electronic mail, fax or return mail. Letters should be sent to duhaime@caut.ca.