Seeking An American Identity

We hear a lot about racism and race relations today.

You hear some say that it has never been worse.

Is that true? 

Many people apparently believe it.

That group obviously includes younger people who did not see what I did in the 1950's and 1960's.

For example, consider this Gallup survey on race relations.

It does suggest that both White and Black people say race relations have deteriorated over the last decade.

Is there any factual basis that racism has never been worse?

Look at what the liberal Brookings Institution has written about on this subject in an article "Black Progress: How far we've come and how far we have to go".

That article begins this way.

. 

Let's start with a few contrasting numbers.

60 and 2.2. 

In 1940, 60 percent of employed black women worked as domestic servants; today the number is down to 2.2 percent, while 60 percent hold white- collar jobs.

44 and 1.  

In 1958, 44 percent of whites said they would move if a black family became their next door neighbor; today the figure is 1 percent.

18 and 86.

In 1964, the year the great Civil Rights Act was passed, only 18 percent of whites claimed to have a friend who was black; today 86 percent say they do, while 87 percent of blacks assert they have white friends.

Progress is the largely suppressed story of race and race relations over the past half-century. And thus it’s news that more than 40 percent of African Americans now consider themselves members of the middle class. Forty-two percent own their own homes, a figure that rises to 75 percent if we look just at black married couples. Black two-parent families earn only 13 percent less than those who are white. Almost a third of the black population lives in suburbia.

It might surprise you to learn that those words were written in 1998. Since that time we have also elected an African American President of the United States twice. An African American led the U.S. Justice Department for eight years under President Obama. African Americans have increasingly been elected to leadership roles in many of the nation's urban areas and they also are in charge of a number of the police departments in major U.S. cities.

For example, an African American is Mayor in all of the four largest American cities.

New York City

Chicago

Los Angeles

Houston

Is it just a coincidence that both Whites and Blacks began to believe that race relations were poor at the same time that major media outlets repeated the message more and more?

Source: https://twitter.com/TheRabbitHole84/status/1629797419616698369/photo/1

Is it just a coincidence that shift began in 2013 during the second term of an African American President who was elected using a unifying message but who more often than not governed by highlighting divisions?

In the last decade we have heard how white privilege is responsible for so many problems in the country.

We have heard that white supremacy is the underlying principle behind almost every Republican party policy.

However, considering those narratives, I found this data interesting on how racial groups rate each other.

Credit: https://twitter.com/monitoringbias/status/1629553795242835970

This study suggests that Whites are the least racist group in America.

The study also shows that Whites rate each other lower than any other racial group rates their cohorts---BY FAR.

Whites rate other Whites higher than other racial groups but the difference is miniscule compared to what we see with other racial groups.

It is understandable that Whites would be rated lower by all other minority racial groups since it is the majority race in the United States. All minority groups have undoubtedly experienced some form of racism at some point in their lives. 

However, when you see the next data point is it not logical to wonder if some racism that is perceived by minorities is related to the fact that each minority racial group sees their race or ethnicity as much more central to their identity compared to Whites?

This is particularly true for African Americans.

When a person's identity is tied this strongly to their race or ethnicity it is going to be much more difficult to not see every slight, snub or failure as being the result of racism when that might not be the case at all.

" I didn't get the job because I am Hispanic."

" I got a poor score on the SAT because I am Black."

"That guy would not date me because I am Asian".

As an example, look no further than the comments of Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot after she was defeated in her reelection bid this week.

Source: https://www.nationalreview.com/news/im-a-black-woman-in-america-chicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-blames-election-loss-on-racism-sexism/

Lightfoot seems incapable of accepting that she was rejected by the voters not because she was a Black woman but because crime is out of control in Chicago and she has done a poor job in managing the city.

Do not think that Whites cannot or have not been deeply committed to ethnicity identity as well.

The Italians, the Irish, the Poles, the Jews and Catholics have all been there before as well. They all were subjected to various forms of discrimination at different times as did many others.

It seems to emanate from the tribal nature that dominated much of human life for centuries and still does in many places around the world.

Our Founders set out "to form a more perfect union" when the nation was conceived. It was not perfect then. It was not perfect in the Civil War era or a hundred years after that. It is not perfect now. However, part of the American experience has been to continue to strive and work everyday to form an even more perfect union.

An objective look at our history suggests that much progress has been made toward a more perfect union over the years.

We might never get to "perfect" but if we can make it more so with each passing generation we will have accomplished more than any other nation in the world has.

When will American become the central identifier of everyone? 

The question that the American people need to answer is whether we believe that this is better achieved by tearing things down and casting blame on others or building on the positives, working cooperatively to fix the negatives and all of us spending more time looking inwards on what we can do to improve the lives of everyone.

Those things are not easily done nor is ignoring the media narratives that feed a lot of the divisions we see in our society today.

If we are to truly be "one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all" we must value those things that unite us and reject those who seek to divide us.

It is the only way forward.

The American Dream Is Still Alive

While a lot of people are hoping that Governor Ron DeSantis will seek the Republican nomination for President against Donald Trump, I have found it interesting that among the first to actually announce they are in the race are two Indian Americans.

Former Governor Nikki Haley of South Carolina announced a month ago.

Last week Vivek Ramaswamy, a 37 year-old Harvard and Yale educated entrepreneur, announced he was also running for President.

Both Haley and Ramaswamy are first-generation children of immigrants from India.

It should not be surprising that Indian Americans are challenging for the highest political office in the land since they have long been the ethnic group with the highest annual household income per the American Community Survey completed by the U.S. Census Bureau (2013-2015).

Indian Americans had median incomes that are 79% higher than the average American and 67% more than White Americans.

In the 2019 Survey (the most recent), Indian Americans had increased their median household income to $126,700 compared to the overall population median of $65,700%---93% more.

Source: https://usafacts.org/articles/the-diverse-demographics-of-asian-americans/

Why are Indian Americans doing so well in an American society that we are told is stacked against people of color and immigrants?

70% of Indian American adults are college graduates compared to 28% for the overall population.

Many of those degrees are in higher paying STEM fields.

Nikki Haley's father has a PhD and was a college professor. Her mother earned a law degree in India and a Master's in the United States and was a public school teacher and later owned a local clothing store.

Vivek's father was an engineer for General Electric and his mother was a geriatric psychiatrist in Cincinnati, Ohio where Vivek was born and raised.

Indian Americans are hard working and industrious.

Those who are not in professional positions are often found in entrepreneurial endeavors where these attributes are valued.

For example, 60% of the hotels and motels in the United States are owned by Indian Americans.

Indian Americans are also significant owners of convenience stores and gas stations in the United States.

In many respects, these immigrants personify the American Dream.

Their children are taking the next step in pursuing political power.

Most people have heard of Nikki Haley who was the former Governor of South Carolina and Ambassador to the U.N. in the Trump administration.

Very few have heard of Vivek Ramaswamy.

He is running as a self-described "anti-woke" candidate.

Here is an example of Vivek's positions on some major issues.

Both Haley and Ramaswamy would have to be described as long shots at this point.

However, they both could fill unique niches in the race.

Haley could very well end up being the only female seeking the nomination unless Kristi Noem or Kari Lake decide to enter the race.

My guess is that Haley is positioning herself for a possible VP slot with this run.

Vivek's youth could introduce an interesting contrast to the older candidates.

Could Vivek find a way to connect with the under-40 voter who have heavily voted Democrat for the last 30 years?

Of course, I don't think many people realize that Ron DeSantis is only seven years older than Vivek and he has already been a Governor for four years and a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for almost six years.

It appears to me that Vivek is running for President to enhance his personal brand and to better position himself for a future run for the Senate or Governor in Ohio.

Can Haley and Ramaswamy survive through the early debates and make it to the first primaries in 2024?

That is going to take money which might be difficult to raise running against Trump and DeSantis. Most of the traditional sources are going to be hard to tap.

However, the substantial wealth of the Indian American community (population of 4.5 million) may be able to sustain their efforts better than other candidates who face long odds in this race.

Of course, speaking of long odds, where else in the world would we see children of immigrants in the running to lead their nation?

I am happy to see both Haley and Ramaswamy in the race and how much it says in reaffirming that the American Dream is still very much alive today.

All About Interest Rates

In my lifetime, I have seen the dramatic impacts that interest rates have on investing and economic activity.

At one time, housing values, stock market prices and other asset values were driven primarily by more fundamental issues.

Stocks went up principally based on revenue growth and increases in earnings per share.

Housing prices went up based on supply and demand in the geographic area and in relation to construction costs of new housing.

Interest rates have taken on an outsized importance in almost all asset prices, particularly in the last 20 years.

It seems market watchers pay more attention to Federal Reserve policy these days than they do to almost any other factor.

Many under the age of 40 do not know anything about living and investing in a world other than with ultra low interest rates,

Consider this chart of 6 month Treasury bills.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/US6M

We have not seen a yield in excess of 5% on any Treasury debt instrument since 2007.

To put that rate in further perspective, last year at this time the yield on 6-month Treasuries was 0.66%.

It was easy for the value of stocks to increase when the alternative was putting money in an interest-bearing account or bond that was paying a very low interest rate.

As interest rates rise, stocks become less attractive to investors.

We are heading into a new world with much higher interest rates that will likely have wide ranging effects on asset prices and the economy at large.

Homeowners benefited tremendously as mortgage rates went lower and lower.

The median price of a house in the United States at the end of 2022 was $467,700.

It was $76,000 in 1982.

Higher mortgage rates are already starting to affect the housing market.

Single family home sales in January, 2023 were down 36.1% compared to last year.

Mortgage demand has collapsed.

Fewer people are buying and nobody is refinancing at these rates.

Why is this happening?

Simply stated, at these interest rates, fewer and fewer people can afford to buy a home.

The affordability index is worse now than it was in 2006 during the so-called "housing bubble" that preceded the Great Recession of 2008-2010. That recession was fueled by a drop in housing values in many parts of the country.

Source: https://twitter.com/nickgerli1/status/1628486988268462081

This graph shows the effect of higher interest rates on the amount of house someone can afford with a fixed $1,850/monthly payment.

At 2.7% rates, $1,850/month will get someone a $462,000 house.

At current rates (6.9%), that payment will only pay for a $284,000 house.

Source: https://twitter.com/GRomePow/status/1628469848740179968/photo/1

Are we reaching a point that something has to give in the housing market?

Interest rates don't affect cash buyers but they only make up 29% of all housing sales.

Source: https://cdn.nar.realtor/sites/default/files/documents/2023-01-realtors-confidence-index-02-21-2023.pdf

Note as well in the survey highlights above that last year 46% of all properties sold above the list price.

In January, 2023, only 16% sold above list.

This indicates that the housing market is quickly softening in the face of higher interest rates.

We are also seeing consumer loans outstanding increasing rapidly as more and more households feel the effect of inflation.

The cost squeeze on households is also apparent in looking at the plummeting personal savings rate.

Credit: https://twitter.com/WallStreetSilv/status/1627732511441707010

 

At the same time that credit card balances are exploding, the average interest rates on those credit cards have reached the highest levels ever.

Average rates on cards are 20%.

Source: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/troubling-signs-emerge-as-credit-card-debt-hits-record-high-160607906.html?ncid=twitter_yfsocialtw_l1gbd0noiom

At this point, the stock market and employment have held up reasonably well as interest rates have risen.

The S&P 500 is actually up by about 5% in 2023 thus far.

Can this continue in the face of the interest rate environment? 

Inflation has not come down as quickly as many economists believed it would.

In fact, the month to month increase in January of .5% was the highest it has been in the last seven months (tied with October).

Source: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm

The Federal Reserve has indicated that it will not stop increasing the Fed Funds rate until inflation looks like it is heading to the 2% policy target.

Most observers believed that we would not see any further 50 basis point increases by the Fed.  

That is no longer the case.

 

We are at a point that it is all about interest rates now.

How high will they go?

Can the economy withstand the shock of those increases in interest rates?

It is always the goal of the Fed that when things get overheated it is attempting to bring the economy and inflation down with a soft landing by increasing interest rates.

Bringing inflation down with a soft landing will not be easy.

A lot of easy money was made with low interest rates.

Everything gets much harder when they go the other way. 

The question is how hard will it get and how hard the landing is going to be?

Too Much Affirmation, Too Little Action

The U.S. Supreme Court held oral arguments on two cases involving the legality of affirmative action in college admissions in October.

A decision is expected in June.

The two cases challenge the affirmative action admissions policies of Harvard University and the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill in providing preferences to Black and Hispanic applicants such that the equal protection rights of Asian American and White applicants were violated in the process.

You can gain some perspective about the plaintiff's argument when you look at the significant disparities in acceptance between Asian and Black applicants at Harvard.

The chart below prepared by the plaintiff's shows the wide disparities in admission rates between similarly qualified applicants by race/ethnicity.

For example, 56% of African Americans in the top decile in its "academic index" were accepted to Harvard compared to just 13% for Asians and 15% for Whites.

Credit: https://twitter.com/TheRabbitHole84/status/1603422765872054273

Another study of the admission policies of seven elite universities quantified the extent to which race impacted SAT scores by calculating what chances of admission would look like with all things being equal..

The study found that Blacks were effectively given a 310 point SAT bonus and Hispanics a 130 point bonus compared to Whites but that Asians were given a 140 point penalty in the admission process.

Credit: https://therabbithole84.substack.com/p/systemic-racism-in-college-campuses

The fundamental question in the affirmative action cases is whether the 14th Amendment which guarantees "any person" ... "equal protection under the laws" applies to everyone or was it just intended primarily to benefit Blacks since it was passed in the aftermath of the Civil War when the focus was clearly to remedy the wrongs of slavery in the southern states.

This is the third time the Supreme Court has considered the question of affirmative action in college admissions.

The first challenge was in the Bakke case that was decided almost 50 years ago ( in 1978) in which the Supreme Court ruled that racial quotas were in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. However, it ruled that universities could use race as a factor in furtherance of a more diverse university community.

25 years later (2003) the Supreme Court revisited the affirmative action question involving the affirmative action policies of the University of Michigan in Grutter v. Bollinger and ruled that an individualized policy that granted preference to candidates based on race that contributed to a racially diverse student body was lawful.

Interestingly, the majority opinion in that case written by Sandra Day O'Conner 20 years ago suggested that the Court did not expect racial preferences to be necessary in another 25 years.

"The Court takes the Law School at its word that it would like nothing better than to find a race-neutral admissions formula and will terminate its use of racial preferences as soon as practicable. The Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today." 

The Grutter opinion was not satisfactory to many in Michigan and in 2006 an election referendum was passed by the people of the state 58%-42% amending the Michigan Constitution to ban any consideration of race or gender in college and university admissions. 

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld that state ban in a ruling in 2014.

Based on the oral arguments in the recent affirmative action cases held in October, most observers expect that affirmative action admissions policies based on race will be ruled unconstitutional.

What will be most interesting will be seeing what policies (other than race) will the Court potentially suggest are allowable if a university seeks a more diverse student body?

Will socioeconomic factors become most important?

Will universities have to limit legacy admissions to meet diversity objectives?

What effect will all of this have on the overall selectivity and quality of the student body?

You begin to understand the challenge that elite universities have in achieving a diverse student body that reflects our overall society when you look at SAT scores.

The state of Michigan requires all public high school seniors to take the SAT exam. Therefore, it provides an unusually representative score sample across a large population base.

The results for the 2022 graduation class are quite interesting.

Here is the breakdown of the scores by race and gender for 2022.

Credit: https://infoproc.blogspot.com/2022/10/sat-score-distributions-in-michigan.html
Source: https://reports.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/2022-michigan-sat-suite-of-assessments-annual-report.pdf

Some observations.

1. An astounding 25% of Asian students who took the test scored at least 1400 on the SAT. This would generally be those students who would have a legitimate chance at being admitted to an elite university based on academic merit.

2. On the other hand, 0% of African American in the entire state of Michigan scored at least 1400 on the SAT.

3. Only 1% of Hispanics scored 1400 or better on the SAT.

4. 39% of Blacks scored 790 or below on the SAT compared to 24% of Hispanics, 11% of Whites and just 7% of Asians.

5. 5% of males scored 1400 or better compared to only 3% of females. (See my last blog post "Can We Fool Mother Nature?" for more on the IQ differences between males and females).

This difference in SAT performance is not just isolated to Michigan.

You can see the same overall disparities in data in looking at national 2022 SAT scores.

Despite having a smaller share of the population (there are twice as many Blacks as Asians in the U,S. population), 23x the number of Asian students scored 1400 or higher on the SAT exam than did Black students.

Credit: https://twitter.com/monitoringbias/status/1615772792737202176

These facts are undeniable.

The question is what is the reason for these large difference in SAT scores?

Some argue that standardized tests are inherently biased. They are somehow racially or culturally biased.

However, if that is the case, how is it that Asians and Hispanics (many of who come from immigrant families in which English is not even the primary language) perform better than Blacks?

Is it related to the lack of two-parent households?

Is it the result of socio-economic factors?

Is it due to inferior primary and secondary schools?

What is also undeniable is that the disparity in SAT scores has not really changed in decades despite a lot of talk and billions of dollars being spent to narrow the gap.

For example, the Democrat party platform in 2000 (23 years ago) pledged that by 2004 the achievement gap between students of color and the rest of America's students should be eliminated.

Credit: https://twitter.com/monitoringbias/status/1621714167030857728

The reality is that there has been no real change over the last several decades. The only real difference is the disparity between Asian students and everybody else has just gotten larger.

Credit: https://twitter.com/monitoringbias/status/1621714169723756546

Are there any good answers to fix the achievement gap as the Democrats stated they were going to do 20 years ago?

No.

Today the only answer seems to be to ignore SAT/ACT scores altogether.

I guess the truths in the scores are too inconvenient for college administrators to have to deal with.

A recent survey indicates that 80% of U.S. bachelor-degree granting institutions will not require applicants to submit ACT or SAT exams scores in the admissions process this year.

Source: Forbes.com

Isn't that convenient?

If you have no objective measure to compare applicants it is harder for anyone to question your admission decisions.

It is also ironic in that the SAT was originally developed by Harvard to identify academically gifted boys who did not attend the Eastern boarding schools which were the traditional pipeline to the Ivy League. Harvard wanted to reach out for overlooked talent who did not have the advantages of the well-heeled prepsters but who had the raw academic potential to compete at Harvard even though they might not have had access to first-class high school education.

Of course, the only reason the SAT (or any other standardized test) should be given consideration is if it  can assist in separating the wheat from the chaff.  How do I determine which student is better prepared for college and beyond-the "A" student from the Choate School, Chillicothe, Ohio or South Central LA?  Can it reliably predict college success?

Most studies still indicate the SAT (or ACT) is the best predictive tool we have (even adjusting for socioeconomic status) for academic success in college.

It makes you wonder how disregarding these tests is going to allow colleges to better allocate admission slots for deserving students in under represented groups?

Of course, underlying all of this is the question that no one really wants to discuss.

How much of the disparity in SAT scores (and IQ tests) is not the result of environmental factors such as family situation, socioeconomic status, primary and secondary school resources but is due to raw innate ability?

No one is supposed to go there but there is data suggesting that there are IQ differences related to race/ethnicity.

Others argue that this is completely false and that even IQ scores are affected so much by environmental factors that there is no difference in innate intelligence between different races and ethnicities.

For example, some studies have suggested that Ashkenazi Jews have the highest average IQ of any ethnic or racial group for which reliable data is available. This corresponds to an IQ of 112-115 versus an overall average of 100 for the population at large. A disproportionate number of Nobel prize and chess grandmasters have this ethnicity.

Other studies suggest that East Asians in the United States have an average IQ advantage over Caucasians which have an advantage over Hispanics which have higher average IQ's than African Americans. Of course, the variation in IQ within each group is much greater than between any group.

Here is graphic illustration of the distribution of IQ scores by race ethnicity.

Source: https://twitter.com/PaoloShirasi/status/1547627211728949250

At the 50th percentile, it shows that Asians have a 5-6 point average advantage over Whites. Whites have 10-15 points on Blacks and 8-10 on Hispanics.

The differences in the numbers are real. However, what is the reason?

Is there some genetic component or is it all explained by the environment of the subject individuals within the group?

I don't know the answer.

There may be some general genetic effect but I believe the disparities in IQ scores and SAT scores in particular are affected much more by environmental factors.

Let's assume that Asians have a few points average IQ advantage. That small difference certainly does not explain the massive disparity in SAT performance compared to Whites, Hispanics and Blacks.

What do we typically see in Asian American students?

A strong family support system with two parents in the home.

Parents who prioritize and value the education of their children.

Parents who have high expectations that their children should do well.

As a result, children who put in a lot of time, effort and work to meet those expectations.

I am reminded of an experience with my oldest daughter when she took AP Chemistry in high school.

The lab partner she was assigned to be with the first day of class was reputed to be the smartest student in the school. He was Asian.

He leaned over to my daughter during their first lab assignment and told her that she should not be concerned about any of the lab assignments for the year because he and his father had already done all of the experiments during the previous summer!

Yes, Isaac had some real intelligence.

However, it was complemented with a significant amount of parental support and a willingness to work hard.

Did I prevent my daughter from reaching her full academic potential because I did not call up the Chemistry teacher the previous Spring to get the lab assignments and then work with her during the Summer on her AP Chemistry experiments in advance? I guess I did.

As I stated, I don't know what explains the achievement gaps we see today in education.

However, I do know that the gap has not gotten any better after almost 50 years of affirmative action programs.

It has not gotten better despite billions and billions of dollars being spent to close the gap.

It has not gotten better despite thousands and thousands of positions being added in educational administration focused on diversity and inclusion.

I also know that every individual has unique talents, skills and abilities. These talents and skills are not distributed equally. They never were and never will be.

However, I also know that any differences in innate ability and talent are small in relation to what hard work, effort, commitment and dedication can mean to any endeavor. ( See a blog post I wrote on this subject, "Toil,Training and Talent".

The best answer we are being given today about the education achievement gap seems to be that we are going to solve it by ignoring it.  It is not real, or it is racist, or it is irrelevant to one's college and future success.

There seems to be more interest in lowering the bar so that everyone can clear it than doing the hard work of raising people up to meet higher expectations.

I cannot see how this benefits anyone in the end. 

The last time the Supreme Court considered affirmative action 20 years ago it could not conceive that it would still be necessary in another 25 years.  

And that was 25 years after the Supreme Court had to first consider that affirmative action was leading us down a path of reverse discrimination. 

And yet here we are again almost 50 years later.

Too much affirmation. Too little action.

We can only hope that the Supreme Court can craft a decision that gives everybody their best opportunity for equal protection under the law as well as an opportunity to better their lives.

Postscript:

Further to the point that a whole lot of money is being spent and progressive policies implemented to narrow the academic achievement gap of Black students without much to show for it, consider this data from the State of Illinois that lists 53 schools where NOT ONE student can do math at grade level.

Almost all of these are Black majority schools.

In particular, look at the school underlined in red---Williams Medical Prep High School.

Source: https://wirepoints.org/not-a-single-student-can-do-math-at-grade-level-in-53-illinois-schools-for-reading-its-30-schools-wirepoints/

This is the stated mission of Williams Preparatory School of Medicine that is part of the Chicago Public School System.

Source: https://www.dhwprepmed.org/

The annual per pupil spending at Williams Prep is $47,793.

Almost $50,000 is being spent per student and NOT ONE is performing at grade level in Math?

Do you think the mission is being achieved that these student are on their way to top post-secondary schools to pursue careers in the medical professions?

It can only happen with the affirmative action we have today.

Can We Fool Mother Nature?

There is a lot of talk about gender these days.

It has become popular to state that gender is nothing but a social construct.

Nature, biology or anything beyond what a person feels or believes about their gender is invalid.

This has led us to being told that biological males can compete against females in athletics and men can menstruate.

A Supreme Court Justice in her nomination hearing when asked to provide a definition for the word "woman" stated she could not.

Source: https://nypost.com/2022/03/23/sen-blackburn-slams-judge-jackson-on-definition-of-woman/

  

We now have the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (EBB) Language Project stating that science needs to stop using terms like male, female, mother and father.

These terms are not "inclusive" and are "imprecise".

The preferred terms are "sperm producers" and "egg producers" as science should not assume that sex is binary and heterosexuality is the norm.

Left unsaid by these scientists is how humanity survives and is sustained going forward if heterosexuality is not the norm.

Source: The New York Post

Alternatives to terms like “male” and “female” and “mother” and “father” should be sought in science because they assume that sex is binary and heterosexuality is the norm, a group of researchers from the US and Canada suggests.

Male and female should instead be referred to as “sperm-producing” and “egg-producing,” the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (EEB) Language Project said, according to the Times of London.

Meanwhile, father and mother should be labeled “parent,” “egg donor” and “sperm donor” in the scientific field.

 

Someone also needs to notify Hallmark to trash those Mother's Day and Father's Day cards and get those "Egg Donor" and "Sperm Donor" cards printed right away. I am sure they will be big sellers.

It seems if we are living through an episode of The Twilight Zone in which we are living in an alternative reality.

We are being told what to believe. However, evidence to the contrary is all around us.

Is it really true that there are no differences between male and females that are hard-wired from birth?

To show how strange it all is I came across this tweet on Twitter recently asking if DNA testing companies makes accommodations for trans people?

.

Source: https://twitter.com/monitoringbias/status/1624101111211733007

The friend is uncomfortable that what "she" believes to be true is not the truth?

Accommodations for DNA?

It is true that all women are not alike, nor are all men. 

If we look at physical attributes alone, there are women that are stronger, faster and more athletic than some men. I don't think many men would want to challenge Brittney Griner to a game of one-on-one basketball, Serena William to a game of tennis or Allyson Felix to a 100-meter dash.  

There are overlapping bell curves with respect to the physical abilities of men and women. Some women will always have better physical abilities than some men.  However, most men will enjoy physical advantages over most women. It is a biological fact.

What about intelligence?

Most studies of IQ tests show that there are little differences in the average IQ between men and women.

However, I was surprised recently when I saw this graphic of the top chess players of all time by rating and gender.

Source: https://twitter.com/monitoringbias/status/1623014046613090322/photo/1

Of the 102 chess players who have achieved a rating of 2650 or higher only one is a female.

That female is Judit Polgar who I have written about in these pages before.

How do you explain the huge difference in chess ability between males and females?

Is it nature? Nurture? Something else altogether?

I recently spent some time looking at the issue of differences in intelligence between males and females.

If you look at the college graduation statistics in the United States you would tend to believe that females have more brain power on their side.

For example, since 1982, females have earned 13.7 million more college degrees than males. 

This has now led to the fact that there are more women than men in faculty positions at postsecondary institutions in the United States.  35 years ago there were twice as many men in faculty positions as women.

Source: https://twitter.com/monitoringbias/status/1623382796029857793

When I looked into the question further I found that while the average IQ of men and women is about the same, there is a significant difference in the distribution of intelligence.

Female intelligence is clustered around the mean. However, male intelligence varies greatly across the spectrum. 

This graphic shows the different bell curves comparing men and women regarding IQ distribution.

Women are grouped very tightly around the mean. Men have far fewer around the mean with many more well below and well above average.

Walter Block in an article "The Truth About Gender IQ Differences" had this observation about a possible reason for why the distribution of IQ might be this way.

Differences such as these are often chalked up to cultural sexism, but the reality is that such imbalance is most likely biological. It is almost as if men are nature’s crapshoot, while women are assigned the role of insurance. Consider the biological role of women to give birth, and what it would have done to the population throughout history if the grouping of women around the mean were reversed. The population would be in trouble. More women at the extreme low end of the IQ curve would mean more that are not capable of bringing up the next generation. They would have been too busy occupying the mental institutions, jails, or living homeless on the street. More genius women on the extreme high end of the IQ would mean more drawn into demanding professions and less available for motherhood.

This is undoubtedly not a popular opinion to voice in today's world.

However, take another look at the graphic above.

That graph is not the product of someone's imagination. Those are FACTS. 

Perhaps the fact that there are more men than women who are chess grandmasters, Nobel laureates in physics, chemistry and economics, and winners of the Fields medal in mathematics is not due to systemic sexism.

The same is true for why we see many more males than females who are homeless, in jail, or living in mental institutions.

When you also consider the fact that it has also been shown in studies that there is a pretty close relationship between cognitive ability and wages this may also explain some of the gender disparities in income that are reported.

Source: https://academic.oup.com/esr/advance-article/doi/10.1093/esr/jcac076/7008955?login=false

Interestingly, this study indicates that the cognitive ability/wage advantage plateaued at around the 90th percentile. Those in the top 1% in wages actually scored slightly worse in cognitive ability than those in the income strata right below them.

What does Block say about the relationship of IQ and incomes?

Suppose that what I’ve said about male versus female IQ distribution is correct. Is it better to share this information with women so they are cognizant of it? Or to keep it from them by cancelling all who espouse it, and to let women continue to think they are kept out of top jobs because of sexism? At present, we seem to be adopting the latter course of action.

Unlike the West, the Chinese aren’t burdened by woke theories of gender imbalances caused by alleged sexism. We are, therefore weakening ourselves in competition with them if we continue promoting these ideas. Furthermore, if there must be 50 percent of females in the America’s laboratories to ensure fairness, instead of this proportion being determined on the basis of merit, accomplishments, and skill, then our quest to cure COVID, cancer, and other such diseases will become just that much more unlikely.

Diversity is a strength when the unique talents, abilities and attributes of individuals are utilized in a way to maximize the outcomes of the group as a whole.

It is not a strength when it is used indiscriminately in a misguided attempt to achieve "equity" between  individuals when basic truths about the unique talents, abilities and attributes of those individuals are ignored.

It is popular to tell women today that male patriarchy is responsible for women not being able to achieve their rightful positions in society. 

This undoubtedly was true in the past.

However, is it true today?

Consider this comparison of men/boys and girls/women on a number of dimensions.

Females outnumber males on most of the positive dimensions.

100 women earn a doctor's degree for every 85 men.

100 women earn a bachelor's degree for every 74 men.

100 women earn a master's degree for every 65 men.

Men outnumber women on most of the negative dimensions.

145 boys for every 100 girls have to repeat kindergarten.

291 males for every 100 females are expelled from public schools.

1,314 men are incarcerated in state and federal prisons for every 100 women.

Credit: https://twitter.com/monitoringbias/status/1624666618566529026/photo/1

Is this evidence of a male patriarchy?

Is this all due to a social construct?

Might there be something that relates to nature and science that explains all of this? 

Can we fool Mother Nature?

Covid + Three

For the most part we are not hearing much about Covid in the news these days.

We are more likely to hear about inflation, Ukraine, UFO's or Chinese balloons.

Several BeeLine readers reached out and asked that I provide an update on what I see going on with Covid.

Part of my daily routine for the last several years is to look at the most recent national Covid data as reported by The New York Times.

The good news is that confirmed cases have been trending down and we are at lower levels in the United States than at the same time in 2021 or 2022.

Source: The New York Times

Is this due to the vaccines or is it the result of increasing natural immunity?

Interestingly, a large percentage of the U.S. population seems to have decided that they are done with additional vaccine doses.

83% of the population have received no doses of the vaccine since June, 2022.

Only 16% have received the bivalent booster that is supposed to be effective against the Omicron variant.

Credit: https://twitter.com/Humble_Analysis/status/1623866871601844224

A large percentage of people have clearly reached their own conclusion that the vaccine is not going to prevent them from getting Covid or transmitting the virus despite what they were told when many were mandated to get it or lose their jobs.

Of course, we still hear that the vaccine will prevent severe disease and keep you out of the hospital.

However, the current data on hospitalizations raises questions about that assertion.

The highest rates of Covid hospitalizations right now are almost all in states with the highest vaccination rates.

Source: The New York Times

Is this merely a coincidence?

We have also recently seen Dr. Anthony Fauci co-authoring an article in a scientific journal which effectively admits that flu and Covid vaccines have proven to be very ineffective at preventing infection and disease.

Regarding the flu vaccines that Fauci and the CDC push every year.

“After more than 60 years of experience with influenza vaccines, very little improvement in vaccine prevention of infection has been noted… our best approved influenza vaccines would be inadequate for licensure for most other vaccine-preventable diseases.” 

The best approved influenza viruses would be inadequate for licensure under the same standards for other vaccine-preventable diseases?

That does not inspire a lot of confidence in the benefits of the product. 

Fauci and his co-authors see the same problem with the Covid vaccines.

"As variant SARS-CoV-2 strains have emerged, deficiencies in these [Covid] vaccines reminiscent of influenza vaccines have become apparent."

 

This admission is coming from the same guy who once stated that if you got the Covid vaccine you became a "dead end" for Covid and was a leading proponent for mandates.

“When you get vaccinated, you not only protect your own health and that of the family, but also you contribute to the community health by preventing the spread of the virus throughout the community,” Fauci continued. “In other words, you become a dead end to the virus. And when there are a lot of dead ends around, the virus is not going to go anywhere. And that’s when you get a point that you have a markedly diminished rate of infection in the community.”

How could someone that was supposed to know so much be so wrong?

And if Fauci knew all of this (or should have known based on prior experience) why did he push the draconian vaccine mandates so forcefully?

Last week also saw the release of a study by the Cochrane Institute---the gold standard of evidence-based reviews--- of 78 global studies involving the effectiveness of masks on preventing Covid.

The conclusion was that masks "made little or no difference" in Covid infection or death rates.

Surgical masks provided, at most, a 5% reduction in risk. That benefit was considered too small to be statistically significant. N95 masks offered best protection but did not consider possible harms.

Credit: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11702865/Masks-make-little-no-difference-Covid-infections-massive-cross-country-meta-analysis-finds.html

This suggests that if someone felt the need to wear a mask on their own there may be some marginal benefit.

However, there is no basis in science that widespread masking provides any community or societal benefit. 

If you want to see a real-life example of the considerable limitations in the vaccines and masks in preventing Covid you only need to look at the experience of Japan.

Japan is one of the most vaccinated countries in the world.

Japan has injected 50% more vaccine doses into its citizenry than the United States.

It is also one of the most mask-compliant nations on earth. They have had almost 100% mask compliance indoors for over two years.

The odd thing is that Japan had relatively few Covid infections until after the vaccines were introduced.

What is worse is that 89% of Japan's Covid deaths have come after the introduction of the vaccines.

Unfortunately, deaths have been accelerating in Japan the last several months especially with its large, aged population.

There have been more deaths from Covid in the first five weeks of 2023 than there were in Japan for the first 15 months of the pandemic.

Recall that Japan was the first country outside of China to get global attention when the Diamond Princess cruise ship docked in Yokohama in February, 2020. 

Despite that early potential exposure to the virus it was not until after millions and millions of doses of the vaccine had been administered that it has seen the most ravaging effects of the virus.

Does any of this make sense based on what we were told by so-called "experts" like Dr. Fauci?

It seems to be no different than much of what has occurred with Covid over the last three years.