This is the Introduction to 4.2 the level 2 of Analysis. It is recommended that you first view 4.0 the
Introduction to Analysis and 4.1 the Analysis Level 1 Slide Show. To view the levels process see 4.3 the Analysis Summary
As already stated we will dig down 34 levels of phenomena with operationally defined qualities and quantities, first analyzing the observations for qualitative
characterization and then analyzing the qualitative characterizations to discover quantitative cause/effect relationships.
The organization and growth of information forms in two main ways or world views (gestalt formation processes) :
1) Partitioning the whole into parts and
2) Growing from connected points to view the whole.
0 Introduction 1 Curiosity 1.1 Why bother diagramming 2 Purpose 3 Materials 4 Apparatus Diagram 5 Procedure (For Making Observations) 8 Observations 6.1 There Differences between the Brains of Males and Females 6.2 Suicide high among female doctors 6.3 27th President of Harvard University Introduction 6.4 Affirmative Action 6.5 By their fruits you shall know them 7 Analysis 7.1 Sex, Math and Scientific Achievement 7.2 Napolitano: "The system worked" 7.3 Loss of Generations of Folk Wisdom 8 Conclusions 8.1 Female doctors suicide rate 227 percent higher than general public. 8.2 For Parenting and Government Authority Men and Women
need to work in Pairs with men responsible
and with the control to be responsible. 9 Discussion
These are interestting but quickly added and need work to accurately represent a
quality structure and coherent analysts.
does diagramming have to do with physical or behavioral reality?
Could it be that men's and women's brains evolved from a different set of survival needs and their brains tend to work differently including differences in
diagramming how the brain organizes experience?
From the symbol of Mars (U+2642 ♂).
The symbol for a maleorganism or man.The ASCII code for windows is ALT+11.
The purpose of this investigation is to observe the ways that we grow in awareness. Then to ask if it matters? And if it matters, why? purpose
The materials (for observing) are our personal awareness of our experience, our common sense, our intuition, our outlook and our insight and the shared
observations of others. Others means that all may not process observations in the same way or if the observations are processed in the same way they may be analyzed in different
ways. Males and females tend to respond differently to the same observations.
Our apparatus is our world, our body, our mind and others that we communicate and interact with.
The Pioneer spacecraft were the first human-built objects to leave the solar system. The plaques were attached to the spacecraft's antenna support struts in a position that would shield them
from erosion by stellar dust.
The procedure (for making observations) is to use our senses.
This may sound simple but there are two major kinds of problems that have harmed our brain development making it hard to perceive and/or analyze 1) the normal male
brain and normal female brain process information differently and 2) physical and or behavioral reality now often have purposed distortions and deprivations under the name of
We may have been deprived of the early family care and freedom that enabled us to enjoy exploring and/or may have been indoctrinated before age 12 where the
indoctrination during brain growth stages is confused with natural development of physical and behavioral reality. This is more critical in effecting neuronal growth patterns the
younger the victim.
The oppression of children and distortion or repression of truth due to the political correctness of women's liberation, gay and lesbian liberation, urbanization
and daycare for childrearing is a problem that leaves a deficit in child care and development that is growing with each generation.
The fact that so many young children are deprived of a healthy nursing bond for the first two years, so many are derived of healthy family care with a home and
family life with visiting, involvement in gardening and animal care for the first seven years and the community play in a mixed age group where older ones protect the younger one
should there be danger or a bully.
The fact that so many male children have been deprived of early childhood development in the physical skills with individual or group behavior in hunting, trapping,
fishing, herding, self defense, group behavior in defense, building farm buildings and building houses.
The fact that so many female children have been deprived of early childhood development in the physical skills with individual or group behavior in child care, home
cleaning, cooking, clothing care, gardening and raising small animals.
Affluence coming to South Korea caused the break down of the home and the highest subside rates in the world. Yes they are turning out indoctrinated children that
are then intellectually programmed as parts for a human machine but at what a cost!
Are There Differences between the Brains of Males and Females?
There Are Differences between the Brains of Males and Females!
Renato M.E. Sabbatini, PhD
That men and women are different, everyone knows that.
But, aside from external anatomical and primary and secondary sexual differences, scientists know also that there are many other subtle
differences in the way the brains from men and women process language, information, emotion, cognition, etc.
One of the most interesting differences appear in the way men and women estimate time, judge speed of things, carry out mental
mathematical calculations, orient in space and visualize objects in three dimensions, etc. In all these tasks, women and men are strikingly different, as they are too in the way
their brains process language. This may account, scientists say, for the fact that there are many more male mathematicians, airplane pilots, bush guides, mechanical engineers,
architects and race car drivers than female ones.
On the other hand, women are better than men in human relations, recognizing emotional overtones in others and in language, emotional
and artistic expressiveness, esthetic appreciation, verbal language and carrying out detailed and pre-planned tasks. For example, women generally can recall lists of words or
paragraphs of text better than men (13).
The "father" of sociobiology, Edward O. Wilson, of Harvard University (10), said that human females tend to be higher than males in empathy, verbal skills, social
skills and security-seeking, among other things, while men tend to be higher in independence, dominance, spatial and mathematical skills, rank-related aggression, and other
When all these investigations began, scientists were skeptical about the role of genes and of biological differences, because cultural
learning is very powerful and influential among humans. Are girls more prone to play with dolls and cooperate among themselves than boys, because they are taught to be so by
parents, teachers and social peers, or is it the reverse order?
However, gender differences are already apparent from just a few months after birth, when social influence is still small. For example,
Anne Moir and David Jessel, in their remarkable and controversial book "Brain Sex" (11), offer explanations for these very early differences in children:
"These discernible, measurable differences in behaviour have been imprinted long before external influences have had a chance
to get to work. They reflect a basic difference in the newborn brain which we already know about -- the superior male efficiency in spatial ability, the greater female skill in
But now, after many careful controlled studies where environment and social learning were ruled out, scientists learned that there may
exist a great deal of neurophysiological and anatomical differences between the brains of males and females.
Studying Differences in the Brain
There are now a number of sophisticated neuroscientific methods which allow scientists to probe minute differences between any two groups of brains. There are
several approaches, brought forth by advancements in computerized image processing, such as tomography (detailed imaging of the brain using "slices"): There are now a number of sophisticated neuroscientific methods which allow scientists to probe minute differences between any two groups of brains. There
are several approaches, brought forth by advancements in computerized image processing, such as tomography (detailed imaging of the brain using "slices"):
volumetric measurements of brain parts: a region is defined, and the computer, working with a pile of slices, calculates the areas of
the brain region, and then integrates numerically several areas in order to calculate its approximate volume. Statistical analysis of samples containing several brains are able to
discover (or not) any differences in volume, thickness, etc.
functional imaging: using advanced devices, such as PET (Positron Emission Tomography), fMRI (functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging) or
Brain Topographic Electroencephalography, researchers are able to visualize in two and three dimensions what parts of brain are functionally activated when a given task is
performed by the subjects.
post-mortem examinations. The brains of deceased individuals are excised and sliced. Modern image analysis techniques are used to
detect quantitative differences, such as the number and form of neurons and other brain cells, the area, thickness and volumes of brain regions, etc.
Scientists working at Johns Hopkins University, recently reporting in the "Cerebral Cortex" scholarly journal (1), have discovered that there is a brain region in the cortex, called inferior-parietal lobule
(IPL) which is significantly larger in men than in women. This area is bilateral and is located just above the level of the ears (parietal cortex).
Furthermore, the left side IPL is larger in men than the right side. In women, this asymmetry is reversed, although the difference
between left and right sides is not so large as in men, noted the JHU researchers. This is the same area which was shown to be larger in the brain of Albert Einstein, as well as in
other physicists and mathematicians. So, it seems that IPL's size correlates highly with mental mathematical abilities. Morphological brain
differences in intellectual skills were suspected to exist by neurologists since the times of phrenology
(although this was proved to be a wrong approach), in the 19th century. The end of the 20th century has witnessed the first scientific proofs for that.
The study, led by Dr. Godfrey Pearlson, was performed by analyzing the MRI scans of 15 men and women. Volumes were calculated by a
software package developed by Dr. Patrick Barta, a JHU psychiatrist. After allowing for the natural differences in overall brain volume which exist between the brains of men and
women, there was still a difference of 5% between the IPL volumes (human male brains are, on average, approximately 10 % larger than female, but this is because of men's larger
body size: more muscle cells imply more neurons to control them).
In general, the IPL allows the brain to process information from senses and help in selective attention and perception (for example,
women are more able to focus on specific stimuli, such as a baby crying in the night). Studies have linked the right IPL with the memory involved in understanding and manipulating
spatial relationships and the ability to sense relationships between body parts. It is also related to the perception of our own affects or feelings. The left IPL is involved with
perception of time and speed, and the ability of mentally rotate 3-D figures (as in the well-known Tetris game).
Another previous study by the same group led by Dr. Godfrey Pearlson (9) has shown that two areas in the frontal and temporal lobes related to language (the areas of
Broca and Wernicke, named after their discoverers) were significantly larger in women, thus providing a biological reason for women's notorious superiority in language-associated
thoughts. Using magnetic resonance imaging, the scientists measured gray matter volumes in several cortical regions in 17 women and 43 men. Women had 23% (in Broca's area, in the
dorsolateral prefrontal cortex) and 13% (in Wernicke's area, in the superior temporal cortex) more volume than men.
These results were later corroborated by another research group from the School of Communication Disorders, University of Sydney,
Australia, which was able to prove these anatomical differences in the areas of Wernicke and of Broca (3). The volume of the Wernicke's area was 18% larger in females compared with males, and the
cortical volume the Broca's area in females was 20% larger than in males.
On the other hand, additional evidence comes from research showing that the corpus callosum, a large tract of neural fibers which
connect both brain hemispheres, is enlarged in women, compared to men (5), although this
discovery has been challenged recently.
In another research, a group from the University of Cincinnati, USA, Canada, presented morphological evidence that while men have more
neurons in the cerebral cortex, women have a more developed neuropil, or the space between cell bodies, which contains synapses, dendrites and axons, and allows for communication
among neurons (8). According to Dr. Gabrielle de Courten-Myers, this research may explain why women are more
prone to dementia (such as Alzheimer's disease) than men, because although both may lose the same number of neurons due to the disease, "in males, the functional reserve may
be greater as a larger number of nerve cells are present, which could prevent some of the functional losses."
The researchers made measurements on slices of brains of 17 deceased persons (10 males and seven females), such as the cortex thickness
and number of neurons in several places of the cortex.
Other researchers, led by Dr. Bennett A. Shaywitz, a professor of Pediatrics at the Yale University School of Medicine, discovered that
the brain of women processes verbal language simultaneously in the two sides (hemispheres) of the frontal brain, while men tend to process it in the left side only. They performed
a functional planar magnetic resonance tomographic imaging of the brains of 38 right-handed subjects (19 males and 19 females). The difference was demonstrated in a test that asked
subjects to read a list of nonsense words and determine if they rhyme (7). Curiously,
oriental people which use pictographic (or ideographic) written languages tend also to use both sides of the brain, regardless of gender.
Although most of the anatomical and functional studies done so far have focused on the cerebral cortex, which is responsible for the
higher intellectual and cognitive functions of the brain, other researchers, such as Dr. Simon LeVay, have shown that there are gender differences in more primitive parts of the
brain, such as the hypothalamus, where most of the basic functions of life are controlled, including hormonal control via the pituitary gland. LeVay discovered that the volume of a
specific nucleus in the hypothalamus (third cell group of the interstitial nuclei of the anterior hypothalamus) is twice as large in heterosexual men than in women and homosexual
men, thus prompting a heated debate whether there is a biological basis for homosexuality (6).
Dr. LeVay wrote an interesting book about the sex differences in the brain, titled "The Sexual Brain" (6).
Evolution versus Environment
What is the reason for these gender differences in structure and function? What is the reason for these gender differences in structure
According to the Society for Neuroscience, the largest professional organization in this area,
evolution is what gives sense to it. "In ancient times, each sex had a very defined role that helped ensure the survival of the species. Cave men hunted. Cave women gathered
food near the home and cared for the children. Brain areas may have been sharpened to enable each sex to carry out their jobs". Prof. David Geary, at the University of
Missouri, USA, a researcher in the area of gender differences, thinks that "in evolutionary terms, developing superior navigation skills may have enabled men to become better
suited to the role of hunter, while the development by females of a preference for landmarks may have enabled them to fulfill the task of gathering food closer to home." (2) The advantage of women regarding verbal skills also make evolutionary sense. While men have
the bodily strength to compete with other men, women use language to gain social advantage, such as by argumentation and persuasion, says Geary.
Author Deborah Blum, who wrote "Sex on the Brain: The Biological Differences Between Men and Women" (12), has reported the current trend towards assigning evolutionary reasons for many of our
behaviors. She says: "Morning sickness, for example, which steers some women away from strong tastes and smells, may once have protected babes in utero from toxic items.
Infidelity is a way for men to ensure genetic immortality. Interestingly, when we deliberately change sex-role behavior -- say, men become more nurturing or women more aggressive
-- our hormones and even our brains respond by changing, too."
During the development of the embryo in the womb, circulating hormones have a very important role in the sexual differentiation of the
brain. The presence of androgens in early life produces a "male" brain. In contrast, the female brain is thought to develop via a hormonal default mechanism, in the
absence of androgen. However, recent findings have shows that ovarian hormones also play a significant role in sexual differentiation.
One of the most convincing evidences for the role of hormones, has been shown by studying girls who were exposed to high levels of
testosterone because their pregnant mothers had congenital adrenal hyperplasia (4). These
girls seem to have better spatial awareness than other girls and are more likely to show turbulent and aggressive behaviour as kids, very similar to boys'.
Fact and Prejudice
But do these differences mean a superiority/inferiority relationship between men and women? But do these differences mean a
superiority/inferiority relationship between men and women?
"No", says Dr. Pearlson. "To say this means that men are automatically better at some things than women is a
simplification. It's easy to find women who are fantastic at math and physics and men who excel in language skills. Only when we look at very large populations and look for slight
but significant trends do we see the generalizations. There are plenty of exceptions, but there's also a grain of truth, revealed through the brain structure, that we think
underlies some of the ways people characterize the sexes."
Dr. Courten-Myers concurs: "The recognition of gender-specific ways of thinking and feeling -- rendered more credible given these
established differences -- could prove beneficial in enhancing interpersonal relationships. However, the interpretation of the data also has the potential for abuse and harm if
either gender would seek to construct evidence for superiority of the male or female brain from these findings."
The conclusion is that neuroscience has made great strides in the 90s, regarding the discovery of concrete, scientifically proved
anatomical and functional differences between the brains of males and females. While this knowledge could in theory be used to justify misogyny and prejudice against women,
fortunately this has not happened. In fact, this new knowledge may help physicians and scientists to discover new ways to explore the brain differences in the benefit of the
treatment of diseases, the personalized action of drugs, different procedures in surgeries, etc. After all, males and females differ only by one Y chromosome, but this makes a real
impact upon the way we react to so many things, including pain, hormones, etc.
To Know More
Sabbatini, R.M.E.: The PET Scan: A New Window Into the Brain
Gattass, R.: Thoughts: Image Mapping by Functional Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Gattass, R.: Thoughts:
Cardoso, S.H.: Why Einstein Was a Genius?
Sabbatini, R.M.E.: Paul Broca: Brief Biography
Sabbatini, R.M.E.: Mapping the Brain
Frederikse, M.E., Lu, A., Aylward, E., Barta, P., Pearlson, G. Sex differences in the inferior parietal
lobule. Cerebral Cortex vol 9 (8) p896 - 901, 1999 [MEDLINE].
Geary, D.C. Chapter 8: Sex differences in brain and cognition. In "Male, Female: the Evolution of Human
Sex Differences". American Psychological Association Books. ISBN: 1-55798-527-8 [AMAZON].
Harasty J., Double K.L., Halliday, G.M., Kril, J.J., and McRitchie, D.A. Language-associated cortical
regions are proportionally larger in the female brain. Archives in Neurology vol 54 (2) 171-6, 1997 [MEDLINE].
Collaer, M.L. and Hines, M. Human behavioural sex differences: a role for gonadal hormones during early
development? Psychological Bulletin vol 118 (1): 55-77, 1995 [MEDLINE].
Bishop K.M. and Wahlsten, D. Sex differences in the human corpus callosum: myth or reality?
and Biobehavioural Reviews vol 21 (5) 581 - 601, 1997.
LeVay S. A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men
253(5023):1034-7, 1991 [MEDLINE].
See also: LeVay, S.: "The Sexual Brain". MIT Press, 1994 [AMAZON]
Shaywitz, B.A., et al. Sex differences in the functional organisation of the brain for language.
vol 373 (6515) 607 - 9, 1995 [MEDLINE].
Rabinowicz T., Dean D.E., Petetot J.M., de Courten-Myers G.M. Gender differences in the human cerebral
cortex: more neurons in males; more processes in females. J Child Neurol. 1999 Feb;14(2):98-107. [MEDLINE]
Schlaepfer T.E., Harris G.J., Tien A.Y., Peng L., Lee S., Pearlson G.D. Structural differences in the
cerebral cortex of healthy female and male subjects: a magnetic resonance imaging study.
Psychiatry Res. 1995 Sep 29;61(3):129-35 [MEDLINE].
Wilson, E.O. - "Sociobiology". Harvard University Press, 1992 [AMAZON].
Blum, D. - "Sex on the Brain: The Biological Differences Between Men and Women". Penguin, 1998 [AMAZON]
Kimura, D. - "Sex and Cognition". MIT Press, 1999 [AMAZON]
Renato M.E. Sabbatini holds a doctorate in neurophysiology by the Faculty of Medicine of
the University of São Paulo at Ribeirão Preto, Brazil, and was a guest scientist and post-doctoral fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Neurobiology in Munich, Germany. He is
currently chairman of medical informatics and adjunct professor at the Faculty of Medical Sciences of the State University of Campinas, in Campinas, Brazil; associate editor and
chairman of the editorial board of "Brain & Mind" Magazine.
Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race.
J. PHILIPPE RUSHTON and C. DAVISON ANKNEY
University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
Differences in cognitive abilities are correlated with differences in brain size, and both brain size and cognitive ability are correlated with age, sex, social
class, and race. As noted earlier, correlation does not prove cause and effect, but, just as zero correlations provide no support for a hypothesis of cause and effect,
non-zero correlations do provide support. We are convinced that the brain-size/cognitive-ability correlations that we have reported are, in fact, due to cause and effect.
This is because we are unaware of any variable, other than the brain, that can directly mediate cognitive ability.
Some have suggested that perhaps increased intellectual activity and/or improved nutrition cause higher cognitive ability. But, just as physical activity and/or
better nutrition can only increase physical strength via their effects on muscles, increased cognitive "strength" can occur only via increased brain function. Of course,
brain size is not the only mediator of brain function; Miller's (1994) review suggests that amount of brain myelination is related to IQ (as in work by Schultz, 1991; Willerman,
Schultz, Rutledge, & Bigler, 1994). Nonetheless, we believe that the important research questions are as follows: (1) What is responsible for these group differences in brain
size; that is, are they genetically and/or environmentally caused? and (2) Why does variation in brain size correlate with differences in cognitive ability?
Numerous problem areas remain to be researched. For example, it is not known whether women have fewer neurons than do men; there may be greater cortical packing
density in women, and thus, it is myelin thickness or some other variable that is responsible for the sex differences in brain size (Haug, 1987). In a postmortem study of brain
tissue from the temporal lobes of 5 women and 4 men, Witelson, Glezer, and Kigar (1995) supported the hypothesis that women's neurons are packed more tightly. It is unknown,
however, whether tightly packed neurons are more or less efficient than are those that are more. widely spaced; the latter may allow a greater number of synaptic connections.
Serious paradoxes also require resolution. For example, White women have brain sizes equal to or smaller than those of Black men, but nonetheless score higher than do Black men in
general cognitive ability. Additional research with magnetic resonance imaging or behavior genetic techniques is certain to enrich knowledge of these important relationships. MRI
may identify features of the brain that correlate even more highly with IQ than does volume (some possibilities are neuronal density, white/gray contrast, ventricle/brain ratio,
and various specific brain regions). More generally, as Broca and other nineteenth-century scientists conjectured so long ago, it may be the complexities of the convolutions of the
brain, and the varieties and efficiencies of its commissures, rather than its actual size, that is related to intellectual ability and that differentiates populations.
Suicide high among female doctors
HARVARD GAZETTE ARCHIVES
Why do the most liberated highly educated women often Kill themselves?
Eva Schernhammer (above) and Graham Colditz analyzed the results of 25 studies of doctor suicides and
found that female doctors are twice as likely to take their lives as the general public. (Staff photo Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard News Office)
Male doctors take their own lives at a higher rate than the general population of white men in the United States. That's
been known for some time. Now, the largest, latest study of physician suicides in this country has found that female doctors take their lives much more often.
The study was undertaken by Harvard Medical School researchers following the death of a young female physician who took her life in the School's library.
Eva Schernhammer and Graham Colditz examined the results of 25 studies of physician suicides and concluded that male doctors killed themselves at a rate 41 percent higher than that
of other men and women. The more startling finding was that female doctors take their lives at a rate more than twice (2.27 times) that of the general public.
"We do not yet have a clear answer to why this is," admits Schernhammer, who works at Brigham and Women's Hospital, a Harvard teaching affiliate in Boston. "There is
evidence that depression, drug abuse, and alcoholism, possibly related to stress, are often associated with suicides of physicians. Female physicians in particular have been shown
to have a higher frequency of alcoholism than women in the general population."
The women may feel more stress because of gender bias and an increased need to succeed in this male-dominated profession. That seems likely, but Schernhammer says there have been
no conclusive studies to back it up. She also notes that being single and not having children, which applies more to women than men in medicine, "has been linked to higher
According to another study, done last year, the most common way that doctors take their lives is by poisoning themselves, often with drugs taken from their offices or laboratories.
Critical of themselves
The Harvard researchers published the results of their investigation in the December issue of the American Journal of
Psychiatry. In this report, they cite evidence from other studies that doctors who kill themselves "are more critical of others and of themselves, and are more likely to blame
themselves for their own illnesses."
Other studies conclude that doctors feel uncomfortable turning to their colleagues for help. Instead, they may "resort to alcohol or drugs and isolation. Once they seek help,
it appears likely they are not taken seriously enough by their fellow colleagues." One investigation found that more than half of physicians who sought help later committed
suicide. Although they had been diagnosed with psychiatric problems, none were hospitalized before they took their lives.
Schernhammer and Colditz believe that the underlying risk factors for female physicians' suicide could make them good targets for prevention programs. They highlight such factors
as a high incidence of psychiatric disorders, especially depression. Also, excessive drug use can be a sign that they are under the kind of stress and strain that leads to suicide.
The researchers recommend that the higher risk of suicide among physicians, particularly female physicians, be recognized nationally. They suggest that more studies be done to
determine the causes of the suicides and to find possible ways to stop them. As a model for such intervention, they cite a program that resulted in dropping the suicide rate among
U.S. Air Force personnel from 16.4 per 100,000 people to 9.4 per 100,000 in two years. These interventions should, they say, include discreet and confidential access to
psychotherapy for stressed-out physicians.
Last but not least, Schernhammer suggests "an open discussion of the stress encountered in medical careers is critical for successful early recognition of impairment and risk
Summers also served as the 27th President of Harvard University
from 2001 to 2006. Summers resigned as Harvard's president in the wake of a no-confidence
vote by Harvard faculty that resulted in large part from Summers' conflict with Cornel West, financial conflict of interest questions regarding his relationship with Andrei Shleifer, and a 2005 speech in which he suggested that the under-representation of women in science and engineering
could be due to a "different availability of aptitude at the high end," and less to patterns of
discrimination and socialization.
Summers has also been criticized for the economic policies he advocated as Treasury Secretary and in later writings.
In 2009, he was tapped by President Obama to be the director of the White House National Economic Council. Since
returning to government in the Obama administration, he has come under fire for his numerous financial ties to Wall Street.
"There is no financial institution that exists today that is not the direct or indirect beneficiary of trillions of dollars of taxpayer support for the
— Larry Summers, Oct. 16, 2009
At age 16, he entered the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he
originally intended to study physics but soon switched to economics (S.B., 1975). He was also an
active member of the MIT debating team. He
attended Harvard University as a graduate student (Ph.D., 1982). In 1983, at age 28, Summers became one of the youngest tenured professors in Harvard's history. It was
also during this time that Summers was diagnosed with Hodgkin's Disease. He underwent treatment and has since remained cancer free. Summers has three children (older twin daughters
Ruth and Pamela and son Harry) with his first wife, Victoria Perry. In December 2005, Summers married English professor Elisa New, who has three daughters (Yael, Orli and Maya) from a previous marriage. He currently owns two houses, one in Washington, D.C. and one in Brookline, Massachusetts.
Summers has also worked in international economics, economic demography, economic
history and development economics. His work generally emphasizes the analysis of
empirical economic data in order to answer well-defined questions (for example: Does saving respond to after-tax interest rates? Are the returns from stocks and stock portfolios
predictable? Are most of those who receive unemployment benefits only transitorily unemployed? etc.) For his work he received the John Bates Clark Medal in 1993 from the American Economic Association. In 1987 he was the first social scientist to
win the Alan T. Waterman Award from the National Science Foundation. Summers is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences.
Summers was on the staff of the Council of Economic
Advisers under President Reagan from 1982-1983. He also served as an economic adviser to the Dukakis
Presidential campaign in 1988.
As Chief Economist, Summers stated in a 1991 interview: “There are no... limits to the carrying capacity of the earth that are likely to bind any time in the
foreseeable future. There isn’t a risk of an apocalypse due to global warming or anything else. The idea that we should put limits on growth because of some natural limit, is a
profound error and one that, were it ever to prove influential, would have staggering social costs.” This statement is regarded as highly controversial by ecologists and other sustainability scientists.
In December 1991, while at the World Bank, Summers signed a memo that was leaked to the
press. Lant Pritchett has claimed authorship of the private memo, which both he and Summers say was
intended as sarcasm. The memo stated that "the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that . . .
I've always thought that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly underpolluted."
Much of Summers's tenure at the Treasury Department was focused on international economic issues. He was deeply involved in the Clinton administration's effort to
bail out Mexico and Russia when those nations had currency crises. Summers
encouraged then-Russian leader Boris Yeltsin to use the same "three-'ations'" of policy he advocated in the Clinton Administration-- "privatization, stabilization,
Summers pressured the Korean government to raise its interest rates and balance its budget in the midst of a recession, policies criticized by Paul Krugman and Joseph
Stiglitz. According to the book The Chastening, by Paul Blustein, during
this crisis, Summers, along with Paul Wolfowitz, pushed for regime change in Indonesia.
Summers was a leading voice within the Clinton Administration arguing against American leadership in greenhouse gas reductions and against US participation in the Kyoto Protocol, according to internal documents made public in 2009.
As Treasury Secretary, Summers led the Clinton Administration's opposition to tax cuts proposed by the Republican Congress in 1999. Also during his stint in the Clinton Administration, Summers was successful in pushing for
capital gains tax cuts. During the California energy crisis of 2000, then-Treasury Secretary Summers teamed with Alan Greenspan and Enron executive Kenneth Lay to lecture California Governor Gray Davis
on the causes of the crisis, explaining that the problem was excessive government regulation.
Under the advice of Kenneth Lay, Summers urged Davis to relax California's environmental standards in order to reassure the markets.
Summers' role in the deregulation of derivatives
On May 7, 1998, the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (CFTC) issued a Concept Release soliciting input from regulators, academics, and practitioners to determine "how best to maintain adequate regulatory
safeguards without impairing the ability of the OTC (Over-the-counter)
derivatives market to grow and the ability of U.S. entities to remain competitive in the global financial marketplace."  On July 30, 1998, then-Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Summers testified before congress that "the parties to
these kinds of contract are largely sophisticated financial institutions that would appear to be eminently capable of protecting themselves from fraud and counterparty
insolvencies." Summers, like Greenspan and Rubin who also opposed the concept release, offered no proof that the contracts would not be misused by financial institutions.
Instead, Summers stated that "to date there has been no clear evidence of a need for additional regulation of the institutional OTC derivatives market, and we would submit
that proponents of such regulation must bear the burden of demonstrating that need." 
This argument suggests that the default position in the disagreement was that Summers, Greenspan, and Rubin were right, and that anyone (i.e., Brooksley Born) who disagreed with
them bore the burden of proving their position. In fact, subsequent events have proven that Summers, Rubin, and Greenspan misjudged the dangers posed by derivatives contracts.
In 1999 Summers endorsed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which removed the separation between investment and commercial banks, saying "With this bill, the American
financial system takes a major step forward towards the 21st Century."
The lack of regulation that allowed A.I.G. to sell hundreds of billions of dollars in credit default swaps on mortgage-backed securities was a direct result of
efforts by the Treasury (first under Rubin and then under Summers), the Federal Reserve (under Greenspan), and the Securities and Exchange Commission (under Arthur Levitt) to
deregulate the derivatives markets. The first response to the CFTC Concept Release was issued as a joint statement from Rubin, Greenspan, and Levitt who stated that they "have
grave concerns about this action and its possible consequences." 
Levitt and Greenspan have admitted that their views on this issue were mistaken. Levitt told WGBH in Boston that "I could have done much better. I could have made a
difference." Greenspan told a congressional hearing that "I found a flaw ... in the model that I perceived is the critical functioning structure that defines how the
world works."  When George Stephanopoulos asked Summers about the financial crisis in an ABC interview on March 15, 2009, Summers
replied that "there are a lot of terrible things that have happened in the last eighteen months, but what’s happened at A.I.G. ... the way it was not regulated, the way no
one was watching ... is outrageous."
At the 2005 Federal Reserve conference in Jackson Hole, Raghuram Rajan presented a paper called "Has Financial Development Made the World Riskier?" Rajan
pointed to a number of potential problems with the financial developments of the past thirty years. 
The problems that Rajan considers include skewed incentives of managers, herding behavior among traders, investment bankers, and hedge fund operators who suffer withdrawals if they
under-perform the market. Rajan also discusses (on pp. 337–40) the problems associated with firms that "goose up returns" by taking risky positions that yield a
"positive carry." This is how the infamous Joseph J. Cassano impressed his superiors at A.I.G. for a decade while sowing the destruction of the firm.  During the boom years of the housing market, the credit default swap contracts
that A.I.G. Financial Products sold provided a stream of premium payments to the company with no expense stream. That's an example of what Rajan calls "goosing up
returns" with latent risk. Rajan asks (on page 388) "If firms today implicitly are selling various kinds of default insurance to goose up returns, what happens if
catastrophe strikes?" This is a fair question.
The flip side of the trade is equally problematic. Gregory Zuckerman in his book The Greatest Trade Ever about John Paulson's hedge fund recounts the difficulties
that Paulson and others had holding on to their bets against the housing market. Even Paulson, whose timing couldn't have been better, spent a great deal of his time persuading
investors to persist with the bet against the market. But month after month, millions of dollars were paid out on the credit default swap premia. The investors saw money spent and
gone that could have been used to buy assets with rising prices, or at least held safely with a positive yield. As Rajan puts it (p. 338), "it takes a very brave investment
manager with infinitely patient investors to fight the trend, even if the trend is a deviation from fundamental value."
Justin Lahart, writing in the Wall Street Journal in January 2009 about the response to Rajan's paper at the conference recounts that "former Treasury
Secretary Lawrence Summers, famous among economists for his blistering attacks, told the audience he found 'the basic, slightly lead-eyed premise of [Mr. Rajan's] paper to be
In a recent paper (on pages 285-87), Steven Gjerstad and Nobel laureate Vernon L.
Smith describe more fully (1) the contribution of derivatives to the flow of mortgage funds that supported the housing bubble, (2) the concerns that Brooksley Born had raised
about the dangers inherent in these contracts, (3) Summers' contribution to their deregulation, and (4) how these contracts precipitated the collapse of the financial system in
2007 and 2008. 
On April 18, 2010, in an interview on ABC’s “This Week” program, Clinton said Summers was wrong in the advice he gave him not to regulate derivatives.
President of Harvard
In 2001, when George W. Bush became President, Summers left the Treasury Department and returned to Harvard as its 27th President, serving from
July 2001 until June 2006. He is considered Harvard's first Jewish president, though his predecessor Neil Rudenstine had Jewish ancestry, and received praise from Harvard's Jewish
community for his support. However, a number of Summers's decisions at
Harvard attracted public controversy.
Cornel West affair
In an October 2001 meeting, Summers criticized African American Studies department head Cornel
West for allegedly missing three weeks of classes to work on the Bill Bradley presidential
campaign, and complained that West was contributing to grade inflation. Summers also claimed that
West's "rap" album (in fact a spoken word album) was an "embarrassment" to the university. West pushed back strongly against the accusations. "The hip-hop scared him. It's a stereotypical reaction," he said later. West, who later called Summers both "uninformed" and
"an unprincipled power player" in describing this encounter in his book
Democracy Matters (2004), subsequently returned to Princeton University, where he taught prior to Harvard University.
In January 2005, at a Conference on Diversifying the Science & Engineering Workforce sponsored by the National Bureau of Economic Research, Summers sparked controversy with his discussion of why women may
have been underrepresented "in tenured positions in science and engineering at top universities and research institutions".
Summers had prefaced his talk, saying he was adopting an "entirely positive,
rather than normative approach" and that his remarks were intended to be an "attempt at
Summers then began by identifying three hypotheses for the higher proportion of men in high-end science and engineering positions:
The high-powered job hypothesis
Different availability of aptitude at the high end
Different socialization and patterns of discrimination in a search
The second hypothesis, different availability of aptitude at the high end, caused the most controversy. In his discussion of this hypothesis, Summers said that
"even small differences in the standard deviation [between genders] will translate into very large differences in the available pool substantially out [from the mean]". Summers referenced research that implied differences
between the standard deviations of males and females in the top 5% of twelfth graders under various tests. He then went on to argue that, if this research were to be accepted, then
"whatever the set of attributes... that are precisely defined to correlate with being an aeronautical engineer at MIT or being a chemist at Berkeley... are probably different
in their standard deviations as well".
Summers then concluded his discussion of the three hypotheses by saying:
So my best guess, to provoke you, of what's behind all of this is that the largest phenomenon, by far, is the general clash between people's legitimate family
desires and employers' current desire for high power and high intensity, that in the special case of science and engineering, there are issues of intrinsic aptitude, and
particularly of the variability of aptitude, and that those considerations are reinforced by what are in fact lesser factors involving socialization and continuing discrimination.
I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong, because I would like nothing better than for these problems to be addressable simply by everybody understanding what they are,
and working very hard to address them.
Summers then went on to discuss approaches to remedying the shortage of women in high-end science and engineering positions.
This lunch-time talk drew accusations of sexism and careless scholarship, and an intense negative response followed, both nationally and at Harvard. Summers apologized repeatedly. Nevertheless, the controversy is speculated to have contributed to his resigning
his position as president of Harvard University the following year, as well as costing Summers the job of Treasury Secretary in Obama's administration.
Summers' opposition and support at Harvard
On March 15, 2005, members of the Harvard
Faculty of Arts and Sciences, which instructs graduate students in GSAS and undergraduates in Harvard College, passed 218–185 a motion of "lack of confidence" in the leadership of Summers, with 18
abstentions. A second motion that offered a milder censure of the president passed 253 to 137, also with 18 abstentions.
The members of the Harvard Corporation, the
University's highest governing body, are in charge of the selection of the president and issued statements strongly supporting Summers.
FAS faculty were not unanimous in their comments on Summers. Influential psychologist Steven
Pinker defended the legitimacy of Summers' January lecture. When asked if Summers' talk was "within the pale of legitimate academic discourse," Pinker responded
"Good grief, shouldn’t everything be within the pale of legitimate academic discourse, as long as it is presented with some degree of rigor? That’s the difference between
a university and a madrassa. There is certainly enough evidence for the hypothesis to be
Summers had stronger support among Harvard College students than among the college faculty. One poll by the Harvard Crimson indicated that students opposed his
resignation by a three-to-one margin, with 57% of responding students opposing his resignation and 19% supporting it.
In July 2005, the only African-American board member of
Harvard Corporation, Conrad K. Harper, resigned saying he was angered both by the university president's comments about women and by Summers being given a salary increase. The
resignation letter to the president said, "I could not and cannot support a raise in your salary, ... I believe that Harvard's best interests require your resignation."
In June 2005, Harvard and Shleifer announced that they had reached a tentative settlement with the US government. In August, Harvard, Shleifer and the Department of Justice reached an agreement under which the
university paid $26.5 million to settle the five-year-old lawsuit. Shleifer was also responsible for paying $2 million dollars worth of damages.
Because Harvard paid almost all of the damages and allowed Shleifer to retain his faculty position, the settlement provoked allegations of favoritism on Summers.
His continued support for Shleifer strengthened Summers' unpopularity with other professors:
"I’ve been a member of this Faculty for over 45 years, and I am no longer easily shocked," is how Frederick H. Abernathy, the McKay professor of
mechanical engineering, began his biting comments about the Shleifer case at Tuesday’s fiery Faculty meeting. But, Abernathy continued, "I was deeply shocked and
disappointed by the actions of this University" in the Shleifer affair.
In an 18,000-word article in Institutional
Investor (January 2006), the magazine detailed Shleifer’s alleged efforts to use his inside knowledge
of and sway over the Russian economy in order to make lucrative personal investments, all while leading a Harvard group, advising the Russian government, that was under contract
with the U.S. The article suggests that Summers shielded his fellow economist from disciplinary action by the University. Summers' friendship with Shleifer was well known by the Corporation when it selected him to succeed Rudenstine and
Summers recused himself from all proceedings with Shleifer, whose case was actually handled by an independent committee led by Derek Bok.
Losses on financial derivatives
During Summers' presidency at Harvard, the University entered into a series totalling US$3.52 billion of interest rate swaps, financial derivatives that can be used for either hedging or speculation. Summers approved the decision to enter into the swap contracts as president of the university and
as a member of Harvard Corp., "the university’s seven-member ruling body" which bears "the school’s ultimate fiduciary responsibility." By late 2008, those positions had lost approximately $1
billion in value, a setback which forced Harvard to borrow significant sums in distressed market conditions to meet margin calls on the swaps.
In the end Harvard paid $497.6 million in termination fees to investment banks and has agreed to pay another $425 million over 30–40 years. The decision to enter into the swap positions has been attributed to Summers and has
been termed a "massive interest-rate gamble" that ended badly.
Resignation as Harvard President
On February 21, 2006, Summers announced his intention to step down at the end of the school year effective June 30, 2006. Harvard agreed to provide Summers on his
resignation with a one-year paid sabbatical leave, subsidized a $1 million outstanding loan to the
university for his personal residence, and provided other payments. Former
University President Derek Bok acted as Interim President while the University conducted a search for a
replacement which ended with the naming of Drew Gilpin Faust on February 11, 2007. After a
one year sabbatical, Summers subsequently accepted the University's invitation to serve as the Charles W. Eliot University Professor, one of twenty select University-wide
professorships, with offices in the Kennedy School of Government and the Harvard Business School.
He also joined the D. E. Shaw Group in October 2006 as a part-time
managing director. Summers also has been authoring a column for the
President Barack Obama, on left, discusses with a group in the White House, including
Larry Summers on far right (back to camera)
On October 19, 2006, he became a part-time managing director of the investment and technology development firm D. E. Shaw & Co. He drew a large salary from this job.
Upon the death of libertarian economist Milton Friedman, Summers wrote an Op-Ed
in The New York Times entitled "The Great Liberator" arguing that "any honest Democrat will admit that we are now all Friedmanites." In it Summers wrote that even though Friedman's
contributions to monetary policy have been highly lauded, his most important contribution may
have been "in convincing people of the importance of allowing free markets to operate."
Henry Kissinger once said that Larry Summers should "be given a White House
post in which he was charged with shooting down or fixing bad ideas." 
In February 2009, he quoted John Maynard Keynes, saying "When
circumstances change, I change my opinion", reflecting both on the failures of Wall Street
deregulation and his new leadership role in the government bailout.
As director of the White House National Economic Council, he emerged as a key economic decision-maker in the Obama administration, where he attracted both praise
and criticism. There had been friction between Summers and former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker,
as Volcker accused Summers of delaying the effort to organize a panel of outside economic advisers, and Summers had cut Volcker out of White House meetings and had not shown
interest in collaborating on policy solutions to the economic crisis. On the
other hand, Obama himself was reportedly thrilled with the work Summers did in his first few weeks on the job. And Peter Orszag, another top economic advisor, called Summers "one of the world’s most brilliant economists."
In January 2009, as the Obama Administration tried
to pass an economic stimulus spending bill, Representative Peter DeFazio (D-OR.) criticized
Summers, saying that he thought that President Barack Obama is "ill-advised by Larry Summers.
Larry Summers hates infrastructure." DeFazio, along with liberal
economists including Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz, had argued that more of the stimulus should be spent on infrastructure, while Summers had supported tax cuts.  Summers had come under fire for accepting perks from Citigroup, including free rides on its corporate jet in 2008.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Summers called Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) asking him to
remove caps on executive pay at firms that have received stimulus money, including Citigroup.
On April 3, 2009 Summers came under renewed criticism after it was disclosed that he was paid millions of dollars the previous year by companies which he now has
influence over as a public servant. He earned $5 million from the hedge fund D. E. Shaw, and collected $2.7 million in speaking fees from Wall Street companies that received government bailout money.
In early April 2010, Joshua Green reported that Summers was frustrated with his position at the NEC and upset that he was not chosen to replace Ben Bernanke as head of the Federal Reserve. It was considered likely that Summers would soon leave the post.
On September 21, 2010, the White House announced that Summers would step down from his position on the NEC at the end of the year, to return to Harvard University. In a speech to the Economic Policy Institute upon leaving his post, Summers "warn[ed] against the creeping cost of
government" and "approvingly quot[ed] Daniel Patrick Moynihan's
argument that increased government involvement in the health care sector is a risky idea."
In popular culture
The 2010 film The Social Network, which deals with the founding of
the social networking site Facebook, shows Summers (played by Douglas Urbanski), in his then-capacity as President of Harvard, meeting with Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss to
discuss their accusations against Mark Zuckerberg. Summers is depicted as dismissive of the
twins' concerns and as unable to appreciate the potential value of Facebook.
Larry Summers had a number of references when Barack Obama appeared on
In the 2010 documentary Inside Job, Summers is presented as one of the
key figures behind the Late-2000s financial crisis. Charles Ferguson
points out the economist's role in deregulating many domains of the financial sector.
^ William Rees. 2006. "Footprints to Sustainability". University of British Columbia. UBC Reports, Vol. 52 No. 4 Apr. 6, 2006.
^ Office Memorandum from Lawrence M. Summers, Subject: GEP, the World Bank/IMFMIGA, 12 Dec 1991. This was an internal memo at the World
Bank not intended for the public that highlighted the economic logic of dumping waste in less-developed countries.
At 15 and raised in the North I knew nothing about racism and segregation, after working on a farm for the Summer of 1955 I hitch-hiked to Arizona to visit Rodger
Chaplin (a childhood friend) at Davis
Monthan AF Base at Tucson Arizona. On the way home I was taken to Houston Texas by a ride where the driver told me it would be easy to get a ride north
from the truck stop there. While there I was told about a drunken black man that had gone into a white restaurant creating a problem. I was told that the owner had shot him dead
and there had been no cause for prosecution as he was a trouble making trespasser.
Then in September 1955 I turned sixteen and quit school and went on the road with a magazine crew. They started me working in the poor inner cities because people
were easy to talk to and would buy less but more often. The Northern Inner Cities had been taken over by black migration from the south. The neighborhoods had not been kept up and
had turned into slums with fatherless homes and women getting welfare according to how many children they had. Dropout rates, crime and unemployment were high. This is where I
learned what white trash meant. It was in white homes where dog poop and trash were on the floor, tables had scratch marks on the crud from being scraped by the plates.
In the 1960's President Johnson's "Great Society" had built high rise federally funded housing to replace the inner cities slums. Johnson's Great Society
approach was to replace the slums with federally funded high rise apartments and lower 2 story complexes. The fatherless homes and women getting welfare according to how many
children they had continued. Dropout rates, crime and unemployment continued to raise. There were many unemployed inner-city black youths. This led to inner city race riots in
the Mid 1960's.
While working as supervisor of maintenance at Lake Erie Rolling Mills in the mid 1960's, in response to the inner city race riots private businesses hired
young black males to get them off the street. I had to take one as an Electrician's Helper. For the first month you would have to find where he was hiding listening to his portable
radio. I wanted to dismiss him but was not permitted. To my surprise after about a month he started to grow in responsible behavior!
Then in response to the fatherless and teen pregnancies there came birth control education and planned parenthood to give tax funded birth control and
I went to Carborundum Cooperation Research working on Nuclear Reactor Control in the later 1960's. Then Gay and Lesbian Rights activists, Black Rights activists and
Women's Liberation activists worked together to get quotas as a restraint on federal funding for research and supplies purchased by the Government. To get research funding or sell
to the Government new hires needed to be black or female to show affirmative action. We were very fortunate that John Kennedy's Space Program had already established the
technical competence to make the technical revolution of math, physics, chemistry and organization skills that led to America's leader ship in Science, Engineering and Computers.
After a leave to finish degrees in Math and Physics, I decided to be a teacher (that would give me summers for my research and time to be with my three children). As soon as I got
a job teaching Physics my wife divorced me. It was a tragedy with no equal in my life. I was teaching Physics based on the Harvard Project Physics Program (Harvard Project Physics
was a national curriculum development project to create a secondary schoolphysics education program in the United States. The project was active from
1962 to 1972, and produced the Project Physics series of texts, which were used in physics classrooms in the
1970's and 1980's. It was funded by the National Science Foundation and they paid for my 1971 Summer course at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI).
The joy of teaching physics by self paced discovery learning was my salvation as the pain of losing my home children and income was so devastating.
My laboratory teaching with small class size (12 to 15) and the one-on-one hands on, self pacing learning gave me two major insights. As a group 1) in both male and
female there were responsible students and Sociopathic, divisive students, 2) Boys were much more interested in exploring with the experiments and doing the mathematical analysis
than were females.
Now as I've traveled to Russia Spring and fall for the last 10 years with stopovers in many European cities I had often used Internet places in the early 2000's.
Everywhere the computer rooms were filled with boys playing games, the few girl were just hanging around to socialize with the boys.
History of term
Affirmative action in the US began as a tool to address the persisting inequalities for African Americans in the 1960s. This specific term was first used to
describe US government policy in 1961. Directed to all government contracting agencies, President John
F. Kennedy's Executive Order 10925 mandated "affirmative action to ensure
that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin."
Four years later, President Lyndon B. Johnson elaborated on the importance of
affirmative action to achieving true freedom for African Americans:
Nothing is more freighted with meaning for our own destiny than the revolution of the Negro American...In far too many ways American Negroes have been another
nation: deprived of freedom, crippled by hatred, the doors of opportunity closed to hope...But freedom is not enough. You do not wipe away the scars of centuries by saying: Now you
are free to go where you want, and do as you desire, and choose the leaders you please. You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring
him up to the starting line of a race and then say, 'you are free to compete with all the others,' and still justly believe that you have been completely fair...This is the next
and the more profound stage of the battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom but opportunity. We seek not just legal equity but human ability, not just equality as a right
and a theory but equality as a fact and equality as a result...To this end equal opportunity is essential, but not enough, not enough.
After describing the specific historical context of American affirmative action, President Johnson outlined the basic social science view that supports such
Men and women of all races are born with the same range of abilities. But ability is not just the product of birth. Ability is stretched or stunted by the family
that you live with, and the neighborhood you live in--by the school you go to and the poverty or the richness of your surroundings. It is the product of a hundred unseen forces
playing upon the little infant, the child, and finally the man.
As the social science explaining impact of such 'unseen forces' has developed, affirmative action has widened in scope. In 1967, President Johnson amended a
previous executive order on equal employment opportunity to expressly mention "discrimination on account of sex" as well.
One of the United States' first major applications of affirmative action, the Philadelphia Plan, was enacted by the Nixon administration in 1969. The Revised Philadelphia Plan was
controversial for its use of strict quotas and timetables to combat the institutionalized discrimination in the hiring practices of Philadelphia's skilled trade unions.
The concept and application of affirmative action has developed since its inception, though its motivation remains the same.
By their fruits you shall know them
If we operationally define a "Healthy Citizen" as:
1) A person that naturally fulfils a sexually appropriate role in marriage, maintaining a single family home.
2) A man that is willing and able to provide and maintain his single family home and fill the role of a caring father and loving husband.
3) A woman that is willing and able to be a home and garden maker, raising children in a healthy nursing bond teaching them to love others as they love themselves and respect their
father as she respects him as her husband.
Any healthy citizen wants healthy marriages with healthy child rearing single family homes with home ownership, healthy neighborhoods, healthy communities, healthy
societies and healthy states. Our insights into behavioral reality and the complexity of male/female differences that accomplish this is nowhere near the wisdom of reality and it
seem we are drifting into a majority of adults being dysfunctional when it comes to raising a healthy next generation.
I taught 22 year in at Sweet Home High School on the same plot as SUNY AB Amherst Campus. I taught Physics (mostly 11th and 12th grade) and a class of ISCS Level 2
(9th grade Chemistry). Both were taught as investigative learning (pairs of student making independent investigation). There were two groups of students that tended to be
dysfunctional. The 9th graders from the local Catholic School that only went to 8th Grade and the 11th and 12th graders that had a parent that was a professor (mainly of the
behavioral sciences) at the university.
We do have healthy marriages with healthy child rearing single family homes with home ownership even as it has greatly decrease in frequency since the 1930's in
America and since the revolution in the early 1910's in Russia with Europe some where in-between.
By their "fruit you shall know them". Looking at rural Europe, North America and China and you will see that the single family farm has born the
healthiest "Homoculture" which mechanization is doing away with.
South America was corrupted by the upper class that often engaged in human sacrifice and from the Spanish Conquistadors corrupted by 700 years of Muslim rape,
intimidation, pillage and domination. India was corrupted by the cast system where the upper casts stole all the property enslaving the lower casts. From Albania to Persia to
Pakistan the peaceful family life of Christianity and Buddhism have been destroyed for over 1000 years. First by the Turkmen as barbarian invaders enslaving the people and then by
converted Islamic Subjects, Turkmen and Arab invasions imposing a theocracy, murder and terror.
The Gypsies were people that escaped the Islamic invasions of Afghanistan, Pakistan and India over 1000 years ago and fled to the safety of Christianity in the land
of the Seven Churches and Europe. Then converted Islamic Turkmen and Arabs invaded the land of the Seven Churches murdering, driving out or converting to Islam by threat the
indigenous Christians and Gypsies.
Analysis (of the observations):
Why do men dominate the fields of science, engineering and mathematics?
Sex, Math and Scientific Achievement
Why do men dominate the fields of science, engineering and mathematics?
For years, blue-ribbon panels of experts have sounded the alarm about a looming shortage of scientists, mathematicians and engineers in the U.S.—making dire
predictions of damage to the national economy, threats to security and loss of status in the world. There also
seemed to be an attractive solution: coax more women to these traditionally male fields. But there was not much public discussion about the reasons more women are not pursuing
careers in these fields until 2005, when then Harvard University president Lawrence Summers offered his personal observations.
He suggested to an audience at a small economics conference near Boston that one of the major reasons women are less likely than men to achieve at the highest
levels of scientific work is because fewer females have “innate ability” in these fields. In the wake of reactions to Summers’s provocative statement, a national debate
erupted over whether intrinsic differences between the sexes were responsible for the underrepresentation of women in mathematical and scientific disciplines.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Sunday that the thwarting of the attempt to blow up an Amsterdam-Detroit airline flight Christmas Day demonstrated
that "the system worked."
Asked by CNN's Candy Crowley on "State of the Union" how that could be possible when the young Nigerian who has been charged with trying to set off the bomb was able to
smuggle explosive liquid onto the jet, Napolitano responded: "We're asking the same questions."
Napolitano added that there was "no suggestion that [the suspect] was improperly screened."
How in the world did the system work? He got on, though his father warned the Embassy in November. He was able to light his bomb. Fortunately, he was not able to do
it. But then again, she was the failed governor who tried to blame terrorism on white men....
Posted By: Grabski | December 27, 2009 at 09:41 AM
No, the passenger worked, displaying individual valor- I don't know how much more spin the woman could put on this- maybe a Barack charm around everyone's neck to
protect the flier.
Posted By: gbnyc | December 27, 2009 at 09:48 AM
The system didnt work as he got on the plane with explosives strapped to his leg.
Posted By: | December 27, 2009 at 09:48 AM
Alas! It worked!??! The procedures only worked if homeland security were the ones that provided him withy the faulty detonator in order to foil his attempt. I love
how the "success" is touted after he was tackled by other passengers. That guy should be paid to fly now.
Posted By: Grif99 | December 27, 2009 at 09:52 AM
So, the hopey/changey system worked? Huh, how about that. Apparently BO's new system is to allow terrorists onto airplanes with explosive materials. That's what
happened, and BO's DHS Secretary informed us that "the system worked." Now BO needs to get a panel of America haters together to figure out how to make the explosives go
off. And another panel of BO's America haters can figure out how to keep intended victims from fighting back effectively. That appears to be all the tweaking the new hopey/changey
system needs before BO's new system is fully functional.
Posted By: Max17 | December 27, 2009 at 09:52 AM
The SYSTEM worked? Who is she trying to kid? The SYSTEM let the terrorist smuggle explosives on board. The SYSTEM let the terrorist get on the plane. The SYSTEM did
not save anyone... a faulty bomb job and bravery of saved passengers! Typical reaction from this administration. TAKE credit for others work, actions and success. If Napolitano
wants to take credit for something, how about the breeches in security, and increase of terroristic actions? Crappy Nappy can place veterans on terrorist watch lists but can't keep
"party crashers" and Soros out of the white house. Pathetic!
Posted By: NapotheNut | December 27, 2009 at 09:56 AM
Janet’s plan... (1) As a precaution, we've rounded up all the white males in the Detroit area. (2) For sensitivity, we're installing muslim footbaths on all
aircraft. (3) If you notice any "fishy" white males, please report them immediately. Especially if they are Christian and believe in the Constitution of the US.
Posted By: email@example.com | December 27, 2009 at 09:57 AM
Typical always "on" Obama political machine, claim victory no matter what, the press won't challenge you with a significant follow up when you have a
completely stupid response like "We're asking the same questions"
Posted By: johs | December 27, 2009 at 10:07 AM
I don't who is more dangerous, the terrorists or Napolitano.
Posted By: Papi | December 27, 2009 at 10:07 AM
Seriously...we waited almost 3 days to get this response from this administration? THE WORST EVER!!!!!!
Posted By: Doug | December 27, 2009 at 10:13 AM
The system DIDN'T work, Janet. The terrorist got on the plane and detonated a bomb. It was sheer luck he didn't damage the fuselage.
Posted By: KPO'M | December 27, 2009 at 10:16 AM
"I don't who is more dangerous, the terrorists or Napolitano. Posted By: Papi | December 27, 2009 at 10:07 AM" Napolitano is more dangerous as an enabler.
but more dangerous than she is Obama, for appointing a moron like Napolitano. And taking that one step further - The American people for electing a moron like Obama.
Posted By: chalons | December 27, 2009 at 10:17 AM
It's comments like this that make me wonder what the "math" is. I was confident with Bush that he was determined to protect every single life on American
soil. Everyone. This bunch makes me wonder if they have an "acceptable number of deaths" that they will absorb before they take it serious. These folks show, each and
every day, just how dangerous they are to American and its citizens.
Posted By: W. Keller | December 27, 2009 at 10:18 AM
Janet, what part of the system worked? Was it your inexcusable failure to require Nigeria to impose adequate screening protocols for US bound flights? Was it you
irresponsible failure to enact international security measures requiring the rescreening of passengers from Nigeria? Was it your reckless failure to stop a known terrorist from
boarding a US bound flight with an incendiary device that likely would have killed scores of people had it not apparently malfunctioned? Was it your unconscionable failure to have
a US sky Marshall on board this plane? Was it the fact that a Dutch national subdued the terrorist with the help of the airline crew? Was it the fact that you have abjectly failed
to recognize the existence of terrorism by calling it man made disaster instead? Or, is it the fact that you are an incompetent liar who succeeds only in shamelessly claiming
credit when no credit is due?
Posted By: MMcSorley | December 27, 2009 at 10:20 AM
Janet Napolitano = Politically Correct Moron
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Janet Napolitano is a Bumbling Idiot
I am really getting sick of politics and politicians.
Politicians do absolutely nothing now a days except for blaming previous administrations and touting failed security measures. Somehow, Napolitano has claimed that
“The System Worked” with regards to failed bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s attempt to blow up Northwest Flight 253.
Only a day later, Napolitano the homely czar, retracted her statement, said that the system didn’t work, and Abdulmutallab should have never been allowed on the
plane. However, she blamed everybody from the Africa desk of the CIA to past administrations. Obviously, she is of the mindset that the Obama administration can do absolutely no
wrong, and as always, George Bush is always ripe for blame about anything not going according to plan.
So what am I rambling about?
This is yet another example of the ineptitude of our leaders. The politically correct mindset will be our downfall, and I fear that it could be fodder for a
terrorist attack on a massive scale. (Whoops…..I said terrorist attack. Napolitano coined the term “man caused disaster” to refer to terror attacks, to be very politically
correct.) Here is a statement explaining her sage-life outlook on the Muslim fanatics who are gunning for Americans everywhere.
‘Away From the Politics of Fear’
Janet Napolitano spoke with a reporter about immigration, the continued threat of terrorism and the changing tone in Washington.
SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word “terrorism.” Does Islamist
terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?
What They Really Mean is that Islam will dominate the world, in a friendly way!
Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word “terrorism,” I referred to
“man-caused” disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks
that can occur.
Politics of Fear? I think that Terrorists wanting to Kill You Pretty Much Counts as Fear.
The previous interview snippet demonstrates exactly how out of touch these politicians are. Instead of using common sense, they wave the politically correct flag,
all the while not wanting to call a spade a spade? What is the matter with using the word terrorist? After all, a good definition of terror is when somebody is trying to kill you,
and the one inflicting the duress is a terrorist.
But no, lets make sure that we don’t use terms like terrorist, or islamic extremist. Those terms, albeit true, may hurt the feelings of these evil individuals.
And if I am certain of one thing, I absolutely do not want someone trying to murder scores of people to be upset because they were subjected to a label. I think that we should just
cut to the chase and call them:
Peaceful Religious subjects who sometimes happen to accidently blow themselves up resulting in mass casualities and claiming to achieve martyrdom.
7 Responses to “Janet Napolitano = Politically Correct Moron”
Bruno Bettlelheim studied folk tales. I spoke to him at SUNY AB on his retirement round of University Colloquiums. Bruno said that he was a non-religious Jew but
that he had great respect for the Jewish Bible's folk tales like "Cane Killed Able", that these are folk tales that have survived in the story telling of many
cultures because of there truth value. He said that the foolish stories tend to get lost in an oral culture but the more valuable stories went on and with the advent of writing got
This simple truth would be more valuable if early corruption of child rearing by the affluent hiring wet nurses and child care in the emerging port cities in
Assyria, the Indus and others. This corruption caused an upper class of sociopaths and manipulators that perverted the sailing knowledge of the stars into astrology and
planet worship making themselves priests and prognosticators of peoples fortunes. This happened before the advent of writing and these sophisticated manipulators, priests and
astrologers destroyed the wisdom of the oral transmission of this great knowledge and history.
More about this later but suffice to say that we need to see the reality of the times in which the recorded events of Jewish tradition. You will later find that the
roots of the history are based on the respect for pregnancy and the rights of children that historically have been aborted or murdered after birth and often as a sacrifice to gods
created by the generations of Sociopathic priest created by the affluent women's lack of interest and then ability in caring for their children.
female doctors take their lives at a rate 227 percent higher than that of the general public.
Eva Schernhammer and Graham Colditz examined the results of 25 studies of physician suicides and concluded that male doctors killed themselves at a rate 41 percent
higher than that of other men and women. The more startling finding was that female doctors take their lives at a rate more than twice (227 percent higher) than that of the general
By their fruits you shall know them
Candidates for Neighborhood Representation, Leadership and Judgment need to be couples with children that are healthy and doing well in a privately owned single
family home in the neighborhood.
Candidates for Community Representation, Leadership and Judgment need to be couples who have served well as parents, doing well in a privately owned single
family home in the Community and having served well in Neighborhood Representation, Leadership and Judgment.
Candidates for Society Representation, Leadership and Judgment need to be couples who have served well as parents, doing well in a privately owned single
family home in the Society and having served well in Community Representation, Leadership and Judgment.
Candidates for State Representation, Leadership and Judgment need to be couples who have served well as parents, doing well in a privately owned single family
home in the State, having served well in Society Representation, Leadership and Judgment and who have at least two generations (married children with grand children) that
demonstrate healthy marriages, private single family homes and children.
Given a woman healthy enough to enter a home making mate relationship with a man and a nursing bond with a child born out of mate love, the main reasons that a man
is needed is 1) to get pregnant 2) have a home provided (food may come from gardening and farming) 3) for protection from other men.
In the urban and suburban socialist world 2) is met by the government and 3) is met by police. Also day care breaks down the maternal bond harming the next
generations ability to bond to their children on the mammalian level. All this has broken down the meaning of marriage, home, mothering and fathering.
Men may be held responsible for paying for home and children but they have no control over that with they are held responsible for. In this environment the autism
rates has gone up about 10 time each of the last 30 year periods since the start of WWII. Some studies suggest that it is near 1 in 25 in 2010, 1 in 250 in 1980, 1 in 2,500 in 1950
and 1 in 8, 000 in 1940. Along with this there has been a similar increase in psychopathy, sociopathy, sadomasochism, homosexuality, divorce drug use and suicide.
Both my mother and father had 8 siblings, a garden, a cow and chickens with a mother in the home. When the depression came they could not buy much but they supplied
there own food and fire wood. Something is wrong today, with all the automation women are not home makers any more. For example, with the affluence in South Korea the suicide rate
has become one of the highest in the world. The major cause of death between 10 and 40 is suicide (one every 38 minutes!).