I must have mistaken your argument for someone else's. Sorry about that.
Either you're the one confused, or you're attributing arguments to me that I did not make, because I never said that a genetic difference should always express itself in the exact same ratio, because that would be idiotic.
Yes, I agree that it would be foolish. Apparently I lost track of the thread.
There are consistently differences between boys and girls performance in math and LA, but the differences themselves are not consistent.
In 30 of 65 countries tested, the gender gap either did not exist, or was shown to be in the opposite direction. That does not match any definition of "consistent" that I am familiar with.
There are differences amongst the highest performers, which are consistent. Believe me, it bugs me more than anyone because I was that girl--the one in all those high math classes--who couldn't believe how nonchalantly and confidently the boys took the tests. I'm sure their confidence (aloofness? unemotionality as teens? I don't know) affected their scores positively, and my insecurity, my scores negatively. I hate that it's a trend, because I'd like to think it's just my insecurity. But if you look it up, the top 5% or 2%, you will see that it is very consistently that the boys outscore the girls, and that differences between LA and math are greater, the further right you go on the bell curve.
I didn't realize clothes were an innate quality.
We are clearly talking past each other, then, because I was not trying to assert this at all. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
