Larry Summers, Martyr
In
an otherwise thoughtful column, New Republic editor Jonathan Chait takes an egregiously wrong shot at the critics of Larry Summers.
Chait begins thusly: "There are certainly subjects that liberals refuse to discuss without resorting to hysteria and name-calling. (Ask Harvard President Lawrence Summers, who has spent much of the year groveling abjectly for having delicately suggested the possibility that maybe inherent differences play a role in the paucity of female scientists.)"
Now, just hold on a second there, fella. Let's consider that throwaway parenthetical a little more carefully.
What Chait is really saying here is that the idea that "inherent differences play a role in the paucity of female scientists" isn't such a big deal, certainly not one that anyone should have to "grovel" about.
This is the kind of statement that only a white man could say and believe to be true.
Larry Summers posited a genetic deficiency to women. ("Prove me wrong," he added.) And I think if you're a woman, you'd have every right, and maybe every responsibility, to take that seriously indeed.
Imagine if Summers had said that "inherent differences" played a role in the paucity of African-American scientists. The outrage would be fast and furious, and few would deny its legitimacy.
So why is this argument seen as a kind of casual, harmless intellectual meandering when it's applied to women?
