RE: Are boys better in Physics - my own little research
There is nothing to discuss, it's a fact. You can like it or not, but that's the fact.
Well, as others have pointed out, it's not so much that men are better in physics based on the conclusions and the paper itself as mathowl pointed out, you can only really say 'Men get better results in physics' - which is entirely different and an important distinction to make.
I have no idea to what extent sexism or inequality or racism or whatever is involved, though it's more than likely always a thing, given the historical nature of academia - for example, women not being allowed tto do research, go to University etc for much of our history, meaning there are, to date, very few historically significant female figures and role models, whether or not they were actually capable of achieving great things. So kids raised in school can only learn that 99.5% of historical geniuses are men (and yeah, white)
But there are numerous quite famous studies raising interesting factors not raised here regarding societal pressure, racism or percieved racism, sexism or percieved sexism and so on.
Groups of black and white, or male and female students are given a test, but the approach is done in two dfferent ways; either 'it's not a test' and 'all students score equally', or it is a test' and 'this race/gender scores better usually'.
As you can guess, blacks and women did far worse than whites and men when they were initially singled out, but the results were equalised when students were equalised, and in many cases blacks and women actually fared slightly better than whites and men.
Of course this is not a conclusive point - much more research needs to be done - but it raises the issue that the absolute, non-discussible-facts-based-on-numbers-alone are not to be taken in isolation.
There is no country that I know of which is either totally neutral regarding gender and race - which makes sense given the nature of humanity and how, you know, women and men are not actually equal biologically - so it's just as reasonable if not more to say the societal impact is the significant cause as it is to say biology of the brain is the cause.
Even if there was a perfectly equal society in which men and women are completely indistinguishable, globalisation and ubiquitous news and media around the world creates a cross-culture that would likely bring this knowledge to those women and create a perception of sexism regardless. Again, I can't say this with facts to back it up, but it's another point of discussion.
I read up on this some years ago, how the balance of white and grey matter, which serve different connective functions in the brain, is different in men and women which drew certain conclusions, but this idea has since been broken down (something I have yet to go back into reading about) and thus needs a lot more research to reach any solid consensus. So again, there is absolutely something to discuss - many more things than those I raise above
Sorry, English is not my native language. In Serbian, better means "scores better results"
This computer is better = has more RAM, faster processor
Djokovic is playing tennis better than me and wins tournaments = he is better than me
In that case - we can't have science or at least a great part of that.
If we dismiss all sorts of meta-analyses there is nothing to conclude.
For example, sports activities are healthy.
No we can't say that... Because people who like sports are maybe pre-supposed to play sports.
Kenyans are not that good in long-distance running, maybe it's just due to culture and not the fact they are fat-less with fantastic body proportions.
I only don't understand why it's not a taboo to say that women from Kenya are faster than men from Balkans, because it's a measurable fact.
However, it's a sexist taboo to say that boys are better than girls in high-level physics/math, although it's a measurable fact.
And it's Ultra Racist to say that white people from the Balkans have higher IQ than Kenyans, which is also a measurable fact?
Well, one person can say a computer is better because it has more RAM which is what they need for their purposes. Another will say it's better because it has a Pantone display showing accurate real-world colours.
That is to say, and I think you know this already, that there are other facets to consider. Yes, the RAM is objectively better in computer A, and if we decide to grade a computer based on RAM performance alone, we can conclude that A is objectively better than B.
But this completely skips the necessity of HDD space and speed, screen resolution, portability etc.
Likewise, saying men get higher grades can only objectively say just that 'men get higher grades'. We completely ignore all other elements I mentioned above which, unless you can show me through research and evidence is untrue, is, as you say, 'a measurable fact'.
I think you, as an academic yourself, should know this.
Well, I never said that. What I did say, in case you didn't understand due to your Serbian native tongue, is that due to sexism and racism which was objectively a real problem in history (women were not allowed to work/vote/do research/be attributed to work), reflects part of the culture of the modern day, regardless of whether it persists nowadays. Measurable fact.
Again I haven't heard me or anyone say that but you defeat your own argument here because again, IQ tests only measure specific features of intelligence, completely omitting social and cultural elements, as well as other forms of intelligence which are just if not more valid: interpersonal/intrapersonal, creative/musical, physical, linguistic, memory, reasoning, verbal agility, etc. This again, is a measurable fact.
The same applies to your physics results. Give humanity more credit than simply a letter grade average to depict who is 'better'. We are far more complex than that. Try to consider why those results are actually there, before you jump on the bandwagon of 'well there you go, absolute fact, indisputable, genetic proof that men are better'.
To be clear, this argument isn't about sexism, it's about academic bias