The gender imbalance in STEM subjects is due to socially constructed gender roles.

Rebuttals:In your first source (Halpern), I believe that you are misinterpreting the results. The study actually concluded that "Experience alters brain structures and functioning, so causal statements about brain differences and success in math and science are circular", and listed several experience-based factors (family, neighborhood, peer, school, etc. ). The study did say that boys are more likely to outperform girls on standardized testing. However, standardized testing is not linked to understanding of a subject (1). In fact, consider the possibility that people who think more creatively and innovatively about topics may find the cookie cutter standardized testing to be difficult (or boring and hence underperform). However, these innovative thinkers are what power society forward. The study also stated that the possibly superior verbal skills of girls is actually very helpful in the subjects of math and science. The map in your second source is quite interesting-- thanks for pointing me towards it! What you said is factually correct, but there aretwo pieces of context missing. Firstly, in European countries, the percentage of women in STEM is relatively centered around 32%. However, in the Middle East, the range is much more extreme (Saudi Arabia is at 1%). Another point is that the Middle East has a very small scientific output and community. 41 countries, 20% of the world's population, only put about about 5% of the science generated.(2) So this example of the Middle East somehow being superior is cherrypicked, and makes less sense in context. Points: As you stated at the beginning of your argument, trends have taken hold of society, and kids today are different than kids then. Now, women are moving towards equality with men, far away from the dainty little women in a strangling corset who cooked meals and raised children all day. This is reflected in statistics. A psychologist at Cornell University, Steven Ceci stated: “If you look at the students scoring in the top one in 10,000 in mathematics in 1983, there were 13 boys for every girl,” says Ceci.“Since then, until 2007, that gap has shrunk to somewhere between 2.8 and four boys for every girl. " (3) This clearly shows the gap closing in, along with the age of girls gaining 'power' so to speak. Additionally, a stereotype of society is exactly what you are arguing, that girls are intrinsically worse at math and science. This actually has a very negative effect on the performance of anybody, if they walk into something with the predisposition that they'll be bad at it. For example, a study found that, taking the following stereotype into account ('Boys are good at math and girls are good at reading.') " girls who accepted this stereotype performed significantly worse on math achievement measures than girls who did not and boys overall." (3)Also, a formative influence on children from a young age is media and entertainment sources. Up until very recently, women scientists are often pictured as crazy (think the Big Bang Theory, but there are several other examples). My final point is that women are underestimated by potential employers in the workplace, who are often men. A study by Yale University found that between two fictitious candidates named John and Jennifer with identical qualifications, John was favored by all sampled: biology, chemistry, and physics professors. (4) This hiring disparity is quite discouraging because even if women are motivated enough to reach this stage past all of the stereotypes (although they are significantly lessening with time), they are also much less likely to be hired. Sources:(1) http://www.ascd.org...'t-Measure-Educational-Quality.aspx (2) http://www.meforum.org...;(3) http://www.apa.org...;(4) http://www.genengnews.com...;I look forward to hearing your response :)