3 ms·
You have to consider that Gizmodo has acknowledged having stripped the essay of several hyperlinks, probably lending support to his claims. This comprehensive
by renaudg 9y ago
You have to consider that Gizmodo has acknowledged having stripped the essay of several hyperlinks, probably lending support to his claims.
This comprehensive recap could be one of them : https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rabble-rouser/201707/why-brilliant-girls-tend-favor-non-stem-careers https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rabble-rouser/201707/wh...
- Quarrelsome 9y agoYes but that's still the soft science of sociology and the author of the OP should tread carefully before asserting this as literal fact. It remains a conclusion of incomplete results. Obviously better than complete speculation but still no stronger than the technology used by the culture this OP is rallying against.
- renaudg 9y agoIt's arguably the culture that the OP is rallying against which relies on the "soft science of sociology" as a theoretical basis. The OP's point on the other hand finds most of its supporting evidence in evolutionary psychology and biology.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]