0385: "How It Works"

[krynd]

http://xkcd.com/385
Alt text: It's pi plus C, of course.

Unfortunately, I've seen this in real life...

EDIT: Sorry about that... (the missing link)

[4=5]

good thing he isn't the president of a collage or anything.

[connorsname]

ahh beat me to making one.

And yes they do suck at math.

[3.14159265...]

Did he mean to do something along the lines of the Gaussian Distribution or did I miss something?

[william]

And yet almost all of the people in my school complaining about how hard AP Calculus is are girls. I know it's heretical but maybe boys are better at something.

[4=5]

http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/1999/february10/mathpath210.html
article on subject

[Green532]

Missing a "dx"?

[shorty]

I've seen versions of this. In my high school, people didn't seem to understand that the best people at math were girls :/
Although in physics the boys took the lead. But still, come on. I hate it when people assume that because I'm a girl I'm stupid.

[ShadowLurker]

It's x^3/3 right?

I do this all the time XD

[krynd]

Ahh, beat me to making one

You weren't the only one. About 3 people made one right after I did

Spoiler:

(timestamp 00:06, though...)

. Had to be one of the biggest rushes to post I've seen in a while...

As far as the "seen it in real life" I mentioned earlier, her name's Lorraine and is partly responsible for various stereotypes around my school (the trials of being a "lady geek", I suppose). Apparently programming isn't something "they" are good at either... Or dancing, or singing, ad infinitum...

It's horribly outdated, and thankfully Randall regularly fights the stereotype (Adventure Girl, Ms. Classhole, Joanna, etc).

[zomgmouse]

It's x^3/3 right?

I do this all the time XD

No, DX.

[william]

And yet almost all of the people in my school complaining about how hard AP Calculus is are girls. I know it's heretical but maybe boys are better at something.

After reading 4=5's article I'm going to retract the first half of the statement. I am not, however, retracting the second half, because it's important. I see a sinister undertone in all the "GIRL POWER" movements and I have since I saw the reaction to that "boys are stupid, throw rocks at them" shirt. Let's face it, if it said "girls are stupid, throw rocks at them" it would have been taken off the stores in minutes.

ShadowLurker: It's x^3/3 + C.

[mehmattski]

On the other, sadder, end of the spectrum:

Girl: I suck at math

It is my impression* that many girls say this and then don't make the effort to even try to get better at math. The causes are twofold: either the girl may feel pressured against studying harder, because it's not feminine, or (more likely), since it is "accepted" that girls suck at math, it's fine for her to also suck.

*impression based on years of tutoring pre-algebra and algebra.

[Robin S]

It's x^3/3 + C.

Not necessarily. You don't know what they're integrating with respect to.

[nahtanoj999]

You'd have to suck pretty bad to make that particular mistake.

[suzi]

I don't think it's the truth of the matter that's being discussed (I personally think that there probably is a gender difference), it's the fact that the stereotype is pervasive enough to make the assumption a *universal gender one* as opposed to an *individual one*.

[GodShapedBullet]

At xkcd I learned that girls can do anything boys can do except not have hair on their heads.

[DVC]

I think the point he is trying to make is that if you see a guy doing maths badly you don't infer anything about his gender. However because of the stereotypes that exist in our society you see a girl not getting it right and you just believe it's because she's a girl! Because there are often fewer girls in physics or maths classes this view is allowed to propagate.

We should actually make a conscious effort to deal with each individual on their own merits, and not to imply these stereotypes.

Someone else linked to an article that talks about how good all round students who happen to be female are dissuaded from going into the sciences. Well I once had an English teacher tell me I couldn't do the higher level of English because I wouldn't be able to manage that and the difficult level of maths I was doing at the same time (I'm male). Basically she was saying that she wouldn't offer me help with English because I was a good Maths and Science student. So, I guess what I'm saying here is that I've experienced the reverse of that. (Note: I now write science fiction and am a scientist)

[Spoffin]

At xkcd I learned that girls can do anything boys can do except not have hair on their heads.

If they didn't have hair, they wouldn't be girls. You can't fault them for being unable to do the logically impossible.


I would just like to ad though, that in spite of its overall anti-sexism message, I am disgusted at the way this comic objectifies the female form.

[b.i.o]

I see far too many normally reasonable people make this stereotype all too often, and it annoys the hell out of me.

[Spoffin]

I see far too many normally reasonable people make this stereotype all too often, and it annoys the hell out of me.

Its okay to do it for the lolz though.

[Herman]

Attn: Girls

You are probably better at math than you have been lead to believe. Consider becoming an engineer.

My college has a great engineering program.

Come to my school.

Please.

[ironiridis]

...since it is "accepted" that girls suck at math, it's fine for her to also suck.

Well. Hear hear.

*bracing for ban*

[zomgmouse]

At xkcd I learned that girls can do anything boys can do except not have hair on their heads.

If they didn't have hair, they wouldn't be girls. You can't fault them for being unable to do the logically impossible.

Baldness isn't sexist, by the way; it affects females too.

[antonfire]

good thing he isn't the president of a collage or anything.

Yes, it's fun to make fun, but have you actually read the speech that caused all the controversy? Here's a link: http://www.president.harvard.edu/speech ... /nber.html. It was blown way out of proportion.

Its okay to do it for the lolz though.

not really

[Absinthe]

zomg! They forgot the differential!

[Izzhov]

At xkcd I learned that girls can do anything boys can do except not have hair on their heads.

BRILLIANT!

Seriously, I think that, on average, boys are better at math than girls (just because of the way our brains evolved), but stereotyping it like that is ridiculous because there are so many exceptions. ;/

zomg! They forgot the differential!

Well, duh. They both suck, remember?

[sqrt(-1)<3pi]

I admit the stereotype exists, but i dont believe in it. I (a girl) even tutor this asian boy in math sometimes! I'm on the math team at school! I tutor my (male) friends in programming! But, there are only 5 (out of like 30) girls in my AP 3 programming class.
eww i sound arrogant

I remember seeing a study somewhere, where they tested asian girls in maths. They noted that the students did better when it was stressed before the test that they were asian than when it was stressed that they were female.

[BatmanAoD]

good thing he isn't the president of a collage [sic] or anything.

In context, Summers' remarks were hardly as sexist as people try to make them sound. Not only did he preface that particular part of his speech with "to provoke you," but he was basically just saying that there's a possibility that there are "issues of intrinsic aptitude, and particularly of the variability of aptitude" involved, which are reinforced by the stereotypes. Note the addition of "variability of aptitude"--he's not saying that one gender is "better" at maths and sciences, he's saying that maybe, possibly, one gender has a less standardized distribution of aptitude. Such a suggestion should not be shocking to anyone, and even if it is, isn't it worth investigating? What if it is true? Should we try to hide from the truth simply because it seems politically incorrect?

EDIT: darn, antonfire beat me to it. Though this does give me an excuse to remove my link to the transcript of the whole speech, since this is only my 3rd post and I'm not supposed to link to stuff yet

[Izzhov]

I remember seeing a study somewhere, where they tested asian girls in maths. They noted that the students did better when it was stressed before the test that they were asian than when it was stressed that they were female.

Well, yes, there's also the factor of many people conforming to their stereotypes (because, at heart, everyone's a conformist), but I still think that, if the societal pressures didn't exist, boys would do better on average than girls in math, 'cause of the way our brains evolved. But there are quite a few exceptions (yourself included), so it's silly to apply it to all girls.

good thing he isn't the president of a collage or anything.

[Baalthazaq]

You guys are all being too specific to the case in point.

Sure this is how it works for sexism and math. This is also how it works for everything related to generalization.

If the "perpetrator" is the same as you: "You suck at X"
If the perpetrator is different, the difference is blamed. "You suck at X, because you are a member of Y".

With Y being in this case "Women", and X being "Math".
It can be Blondes, blacks, Arabs, Jews, Muslims, democrats, republicans, geeks, jocks, whatever.
It can be a stereotype about sexuality, intelligence, skills, peacefulness, whatever.

With problems of scale (the problem of envisioning 3 billion people), means that when we see 1.5 billion people who are bad at math, we find it hard not to generalize. In theory, ~1.5 billion women should be below average at math. That's normal. Even if you meet hundreds of women bad at math, it's potentially hard to work out the real picture because of the scale.

The only reason the same stereotype doesn't exist for another group is that often, you have a firm standing point in yourself. "Men can't suck at math, I'm a guy, I don't suck at math". That is enough to offset meeting hundreds of thousands of men who are bad at math.

It's just the way the human mind draws pictures of the world around it.

[Izzhov]

The only reason the same stereotype doesn't exist for another group is that often, you have a firm standing point in yourself. "Men can't suck at math, I'm a guy, I don't suck at math". That is enough to offset meeting hundreds of thousands of men who are bad at math.

It's just the way the human mind draws pictures of the world around it.

Then why does the stereotype exist more so for women than for men? Why isn't it the men who are stereotyped and the women with "a firm standing point?"

[ironiridis]

Then why does the stereotype exist more so for women than for men? Why isn't it the men who are stereotyped and the women with "a firm standing point?"

Precedent?

[Izzhov]

Then why does the stereotype exist more so for women than for men? Why isn't it the men who are stereotyped and the women with "a firm standing point?"

Precedent?

Elaborate, please.

[ironiridis]

Then why does the stereotype exist more so for women than for men? Why isn't it the men who are stereotyped and the women with "a firm standing point?"

Precedent?

Elaborate, please.

Well, it seems that women have been in a position of being "non-thinkers" for some thousands of years, up until the 17th century or so. Though, that may be my penis-bias talking.

[BatmanAoD]

Izzhov: excellent "president of a collage" pic.

[Izzhov]

Well, it seems that women have been in a position of being "non-thinkers" for some thousands of years, up until the 17th century or so. Though, that may be my penis-bias talking.

Exactly. And that comes from the evolution of the brains of the different genders.

[Spoffin]

You guys are all being too specific to the case in point.

Sure this is how it works for sexism and math. This is also how it works for everything related to generalization.

If the "perpetrator" is the same as you: "You suck at X"
If the perpetrator is different, the difference is blamed. "You suck at X, because you are a member of Y".

With Y being in this case "Women", and X being "Math".
It can be Blondes, blacks, Arabs, Jews, Muslims, democrats, republicans, geeks, jocks, whatever.
It can be a stereotype about sexuality, intelligence, skills, peacefulness, whatever.

With problems of scale (the problem of envisioning 3 billion people), means that when we see 1.5 billion people who are bad at math, we find it hard not to generalize. In theory, ~1.5 billion women should be below average at math. That's normal. Even if you meet hundreds of women bad at math, it's potentially hard to work out the real picture because of the scale.

The only reason the same stereotype doesn't exist for another group is that often, you have a firm standing point in yourself. "Men can't suck at math, I'm a guy, I don't suck at math". That is enough to offset meeting hundreds of thousands of men who are bad at math.

It's just the way the human mind draws pictures of the world around it.

I think its probably more about the girls and maths stereotype, opposed to baseless sexism. See http://xkcd.com/322/

[SilentSnow]

As a female majoring in math and computer science, I must admit that this stereotype is seen often enough- and I so enjoy beating it down at any given opportunity.

But at the same time, I can see where people are coming from. Far too many girls I know seem to think that they can't be good at math, even if they're in high level math courses, while guys never seem to have a problem with it. And, given any math competition or math department, you're going to find far more guys than girls. It is, sadly enough, a fact. But hopefully, this will just encourage all those other lovely females in math to keep on proving that we can be scientific, too.

(It's probably sad that I created an account just to post this, seeing as this is xkcd, and there will be plenty of other girls who share my situation. Well, the more the merrier!)

[Spoffin]

At xkcd I learned that girls can do anything boys can do except not have hair on their heads.

If they didn't have hair, they wouldn't be girls. You can't fault them for being unable to do the logically impossible.

Baldness isn't sexist, by the way; it affects females too.

*tilts head*

Intentionally misunderstanding for comedy?