Scientific paper on male variability was suppressed by academics; ‘right-wing media may pick this up’

Scientific paper on male variability was suppressed by academics; ‘right-wing media may pick this up’
Image: Shutterstock

[Ed. – The paper is online (h/t to reader David Casper at Hot Air; see Facebook comments section), but it was rejected, apparently through an opaque (to the point of deceptive) process, in multiple publishing venues.  All it’s about is the long-observed phenomenon of greater variability in males versus females in terms of observed traits like intelligence, body characteristics, and motor skills.]

After some work fleshing out the idea and revisions, the paper was accepted for publication in April 2017 at the Mathematical Intelligencer, a journal which has a section devoted to controversial topics. The paper would be published in the first 2018 issue of the journal.

And then something happened. An engineer named James Damore was fired by Google for writing a memo which touched on the topic of the Greater Male Variability Hypothesis. So when Hill’s co-author Sergei put a pre-publication version of the paper online, their problems began:

On August 16, a representative of the Women In Mathematics (WIM) chapter in his department at Penn State contacted him to warn that the paper might be damaging to the aspirations of impressionable young women. …

Continue reading →

For your convenience, you may leave commments below using either the Spot.IM commenting system or the Facebook commenting system. If Spot.IM is not appearing for you, please disable AdBlock to leave a comment.

Commenting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.