NYTimes: 'Women in Science: The Battle Moves to the Trenches'

Isn't that an oxymoron? Seriously though; if we continue to use tactics such as lowering standards and enforcing quota systems to recruit (underqualified) women into the hard sciences, just to be politically correct, what will the future hold? Perhaps societies will revert back to where free-rides are no longer affordable. Instead; commitment, hard work, and tenacity will once again be the primary assets that determine success (not necessarily a bad thing). Fem-Nazis may be biting the very hand that feeds them; undermining the society that has catered to their slightest whim at any cost!

That women are just too stupid for science - this is so obvious, that even those feminist men in political elite, who are pushing misandric laws, are well aware of it. Women are smart enough for domestic life, but for doing science they simply do not have enough number of neurons in their brains. Because of that fundamental lack in the female brain mass any talks about "narrowing gap" between men's and women's performance in science are just another feminist nonsense:

"The organizers point to ample evidence that any performance gap between men and women is changeable and is shrinking to the vanishing point."

About real differences between men's and women's IQ read here.

The question is not whether women can do science or not. The question is what goals are pursuing those who are destroying Western science, why do they do it, and what do they want to get in the end.

Some lady complains in the article, that "some women have to find their own mentors". Gee whiz, I wonder why. Could part of the reason be due to the fact, that the male professors are afraid to be mentors to women, knowing they are risking sexual harassment suits if they even look at their "mentee" the wrong way? If I was head of a department, such as say electrical engineering, I would hire as few women as required, just enough to meet the quota system standards. That way I could minimize risk to my position and reputation, which took a lifetime of study and strenuous research to achieve, against a sexual harassment suit in my department brought by a 20-something flirtatious, cackling, associate professor wannabee.

-axo

The guy who wrote it is much unlike yourself. Whereas as he is a apologist jackass, spending at least half the space of the article talking about women's superior points, how they "work harder", and have been discriminated against; whereas you are an over-reacting, bombastic neanderthal who spews forth incorrect logic and severly biased points of view, which feminist trolls love to post on this site.
Note: a troll is in this case, a feminist (either man or woman) who invades this site, and sometimes employs the method of making fictitious or inflamatory posts, that can later be shown to unsuspecting members of the populace as examples of why mens' rights sites are so "screwed up".

In the long run, it won't work, stupid..get a life (and try raising your IQ in the process).

-Axolotl