[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The above statement about the relative mathematical abilities of men and "girls" is highly offensive, as are many things women poker players face at the table. In some countries, about 5% of the mathematicians are women. In others, about 50% of the mathematicians are women. As a mathematician, it's pretty clear to me that there is a strong social component to the choice of fields, and some cultures discourage competent women from entering or staying in fields where they can be successful.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why the hyper-sensitivity? I don't see what's so offensive about it.
[/ QUOTE ]
One thing that was offensive was that it mentioned men vs. girls. If you don't think it is offensive to deny someone's adulthood constantly, ask a 70-year-old black man about being called "boy."
It's offensively ignorant to repeat a stereotype that is both wrong and a poor explanation for the participation level of women in poker. Playing poker does not require you to solve algebraic equations at the table, and by the way, in many regions, girls do
better than boys in math through algebra. (At some point after algebra, many capable girls start avoiding mathematics classes. It used to be that this avoidance started much earlier. The change has nothing to do with innate ability.) The tremendous disparity between the participation of men and women in poker has nothing to do with an imagined innate inability to do the trivial amount of mathematics required. It is a social issue.