The number of politicized studies pointing to discrimination against women or any affinity group you care to name keeps on growing. The problem with these studies is that they, like the studies about the role of CO2 with relation to climactic effects, depend more on volume than on accuracy. They are trumpeted to a receptive press and a political establishment looking for another excuse to increase its control over people’s lives, and their conclusions become law without any skeptical scientists ever being allowed to examine the evidence, let alone testify against them. If the evidence doesn’t prove the conclusions, or if it is falsified to be more persuasive than it was when raw, in most cases we the public will never know.
So it’s wonderful when science works the way it is supposed to and allows other scientists to challenge the results of earlier studies. That’s what we have here.
In “Understanding Current Causes of Women’s Underrepresentation in Science,” Cornell professors Stephen Ceci and Wendy Williams provide a thorough analysis and discussion of 20 years of data. Their conclusion: When it comes to job interviews, hiring, funding, and publishing, women are treated as well as men and sometimes better. As Williams told Nature, “There are constant and unsupportable allegations that women suffer discrimination in these arenas, and we show conclusively that women do not.” Put another way, the gender-bias empress has no clothes.
Congress should hold hearings on the merits of continuing to spend hundreds of millions on Title IX science reviews and the ADVANCE grants. This time skeptics like Ceci and Williams must be included. It is hard to see how the gender-bias empire will stand once reason and truth are given a place at the table.