My apologies. I'm more than happy to admit that men exhibit 'innate bad behaviour' more often than women do. The fact that they do so is a function of them bein

My apologies. I'm more than happy to admit that men exhibit 'innate bad behaviour' more often than women do. The fact that they do so is a function of them being men, and men and women are very different, as we've seen. I suppose you think that by admitting this, I must then admit that women are scared off by such 'innate bad behaviour' and so don't go into STEM fields. But once again the evidence is that the sex differences are significant from at least the time infants begin playing with toys and that they are not functions of human culture or learned social behaviour. Or are you suggesting that 1 year old infants are capable of making sex-based inferences? Maybe that monkey infants have divined the intricacies of human gender norms? Those differences in behaviours based on sex are conserved across a range of primate species, as we've seen. If the cognitive and behavioural differences arise before girls (or infant female monkeys) have ever been exposed to those big bad mean boys and their bad behaviours, then naturally you can't blame women being underrepresented in STEM fields on the boys, and you'll have to look for other (antecedent) causes. As we've seen, those cognitive and behavioural differences DO arise far earlier than you can explain based on some learned response to male behaviour. The differences can only be explained by the genetic distinctions between the two sexes. I wasn't 'studiously' avoiding anything, it's just that bad male behaviours are completely irrelevant.