Talk about a very sensitive topic: feminist issues in the difference between male and female college entrance examination scores

This topic is really sensitive, because if you are not careful, it will turn into a war of words between the lines.

There's always a bunch of people on the internet (a bunch? are you kidding me) who are used to splitting questions into the only two answers "yes" and "no", and then whenever your answer doesn't agree with them, you It's the enemy, and it should be knocked down - so, they have a talent for changing multiple-choice and variable-choice questions into yes-or-no questions, so 0.99999... In their opinion, they should be knocked down. exist.

For such people, it is unthinkable to discuss a topic, and it is only natural to discuss how to spray. Such people please take the initiative to close the article, after all, I haven't scolded anyone for a long time, and I don't want to break the precept.

The origin of the topic is a post I saw in the goose group: "In 12 years of news, Shanghai Foreign Affairs first set a male and female score line to save boys or discriminate against girls? " . It is mentioned in the article that following the minor language major of Renmin University, there is also a difference in the scores between men and women in the early admission of Shanghai International Studies University.

From my personal point of view, it is inappropriate to think about it from any angle. After all, the natural physiological differences between men and women are in my opinion, at least in terms of language learning and future application in work and life. It becomes the reason why the score line is so open.

However, the question soon arises: Should there be such a difference between men and women in any subject or major?

This issue is very sensitive. After all, sexism, like racial discrimination, imposes restrictions or even punishments on a person just because of their gender and race, regardless of other abilities and characteristics. So, if a person asks her to have a higher admission score than the boys on the side just because she is a girl (not discussing transgender men and women, self-identification men and women, etc. JKR's recent deep problems), it is a kind of sexism.

Therefore, we should resist such behavior.

However, if the problem only ends at this level, it will be boring.

Let's consider another question, maybe impractical, maybe exaggerated, but it's a problem -

Suppose that one day, aliens come and live together with the earth people (the "Ninth District" setting), but the number of aliens is far less than that of earth people. Then, the alien's running speed is far beyond that of humans, the jumping power is far beyond that of humans, and the learning ability of the martial arts department is far beyond that of humans (the setting of Inoue Takehiko's "Zero Second Shot"), and then we have to choose a basketball team, so what will you do? Do?

The all-Aliens lineup is a no-brainer if it's for the team to win. But since we are still on the earth, and the earth is still in the absolute majority, if you come to an all-alien team, the earth fans will definitely not agree. Therefore, it is very likely that there will be a situation where the NBA and even FIBA announce that a team can only have a maximum of two alien players, otherwise it will be fined, and the owner, coach and players will go to jail.

Well, here comes the question: Is this provision suspected of racial discrimination against aliens?

A player, just because his/her identity is an alien rather than an earth person, we don't look at his/her/it's excellent performance and ability in basketball, but keep him out of the team's gate, isn't it? Outright racism?

OK, let's look at the next question:

With the development of science and technology, gene technology has become popular, and people can customize their own genes according to their own wishes (a vulgar science fiction setting). Then there was a war. During the war, a group of people appeared. They were genetically adjusted to have superior intelligence, a memory against the sky, and a learning ability that was immortal. Then the war was over. Out of humanitarianism, of course you couldn’t destroy this group of genetically modified humans, so let them form a self-enclosed group called the Heaven and Human Race. After another few decades, this group began to communicate closely with ordinary humans. So, the question arises: Should ordinary people and celestial beings be admitted according to the same grades when they are admitted to universities?

Obviously, according to the unified score line, the advantage of the human race is too great that day, and it is impossible for ordinary people to pass the heaven and human race. And if the score line is not uniform, isn't this blatant racism?

These two questions seem ridiculous: There are naturally huge physiological differences between the two groups here, why do you want to compare them on the same platform? It doesn't make sense. This is like insisting that a cheetah and a snail are placed together faster than the running speed, and then saying that the starting point is the same is wrong, and the starting point is not the same as species discrimination. Isn't this outright stupidity?

Well, this is a very crucial question:

Are high school boys and girls even saying there are obvious biological differences between men and women?

The question itself is of course yes, after all, the physiology is different. So the so-called physiological differences here do not refer to differences in physiological structure, but to differences related to specific jobs, specific tasks, and specific needs.

For example, during a war, the enemy's bunkers are to be bombed, and then the high-tech equipment such as exoskeleton mechas and unmanned fighter jets on both sides are exhausted, and only people can fight. Then you have a male soldier and a female soldier, and then you can I don’t know which of the two is the fastest runner in normal times. You are the new blasting team leader. You don’t have enough time. Let them run a 100-meter run to see who is faster. Now you have to choose one person to run past each other with a pack of explosives. Throw the fire blockade net thrown by Xiao Li Fei Dao to blow up the bunker, who would you choose?

At this time, under normal circumstances, the high probability is that the male soldier runs faster than the female soldier, so let him perform the task with a higher success rate.

At this time, if an AI assistant military advisor jumped out and said that your choice of male soldiers was gender discrimination against female soldiers, would you blow up the CPU of this AI military officer with one shot?

This is the natural physiological difference between men and women, you can't deny it - maybe when it is specific to an individual, you will find that female soldiers do run faster than male soldiers in the above brain-dead problem, but when you have no time and no channels In the case of obtaining this comparison result, according to the probability distribution of the natural physiological differences between men and women reflected in specific individuals, choosing to believe that men can run faster is obviously not gender discrimination.

So, is it sexism to acknowledge biological differences and set different standards for men and women in related issues when biological differences exist?

For example, I saw an article earlier that women may have an advantage in fighter pilots because relatively shorter (statistically) women tend to have better blood circulation than men in high-altitude fighter combat techniques that require a very small radius of rotation It is more suitable for this environment, so the acceleration that can be tolerated is higher. So, for example, the man has fainted when the radius of rotation is only 5 meters, while the woman can continue to fly, and then kill the enemy fighter.

This is the difference in selection caused by real biological differences, and we can't say it's sexism -- because, who makes male soldiers really inferior to female soldiers?

Here we can of course say that this is because a population of one gender is more likely to be suitable for a specific task. This is not for this gender, but under the standard that the task itself is fair to all genders, a population of a certain gender is naturally more suitable.

So, let's discuss the next topic:

It is assumed that a task can be divided into several subtasks, and each task has the same requirements for men and women, but because there are natural physiological differences between men and women, each subtask has a natural screening for men and women, and some subtasks are more Suitable for men to complete, some more suitable for women to complete. In this case, the general task must set a unified screening standard for various reasons. How should it be done?

For example, to complete a combat mission, you need a soldier to run fast enough, and then have a high enough fighter fighting skill. Obviously, more men will pass the running speed test in the first task, and more women may pass the combat skill test in the latter task. The following question is: How do you set a unified standard to choose?

You can't really get them to fight once, the screening has to be done before the objective mission happens.

Therefore, a common method is to make a weighted average of the results of the two assessments according to a certain weight.

This approach seems reasonable and generally works well.

But what if one of the tasks or even all of its subtasks are hard to quantify?

When you can't numerically characterize the target person's suitability for some or all of the subtasks, how do you weight the average?

It's just unquantifiable.

Now, if I tell you that the task you choose requires a person to have a number of abilities, but even then the person needs to undergo long-term training, and as a person develops his body during the training process, these abilities will all be If something changes, what do you do?

You need to judge whether the synthesis of a group of unquantifiable and dynamic capabilities meets specific needs. Such a task is difficult to complete, and often there is no uniform standard - but now I am asking you to give a uniform standard , are you in trouble?

In "The Logic of Failure", the author uses a series of examples to discuss one of his personal views that is very correct, that is, when a problem reaches a certain level of complexity, it is necessary to give a "good answer" that everyone agrees. "It's impossible.

You will always be making trade-offs between multiple goals.

So, let's go back to the question of the college entrance examination.

Are there natural differences in learning ability between boys and girls?

For example, we generally think that girls are more empathetic, boys are more whimsical; girls are better at presentational issues that require memorization, and boys may be better at airborne imagination. Of course, it's likely that this has more to do with the educational environment than the brains of men and women themselves.

We don't currently know whether there are natural differences between men and women in terms of "intelligence," but at least it is certain that there are some areas related to intellectual activities that men are better at or women are better at.

Of course, in my opinion, this problem is mainly due to the fact that when you want to use a unified index to measure the "intellectual ability" that has a very large number of sub-structures inside, you can only give one index after choosing and choosing. Moderate mean. In fact, measuring a complex system by a single value is, in my opinion, unintelligent.

Of course, if you want to say that there is no difference in intellectual ability in this specific field, then it is not bad, although it does not seem to be in line with the current situation that we see that girls are generally better than boys. Of course, we can say that this This is because boys are more skinny and less able to concentrate.

Therefore, if we believe that there is indeed such a difference in the intellectual ability of men and women in a specific field, then the question becomes: whether the college entrance examination itself is too biased towards a specific intellectual ability in the selection of topics, and this Are class-specific intellectual abilities more male-dominated or female-dominated?

This situation is like, you have to choose a person who can run a fast fighter jet and drive a good fighter. The result is that the screening standard is the running performance of the competition, and at the same time, the understanding of the fighting skills of the fighter jet in the written test - this is a blatantly discriminatory assessment.

Suppose, we just assume that girls in high school have a statistical advantage in memory problems, and this advantage does not come from the environment but is physiological, then the behavior of the memory test questions in the college entrance examination is more important, is it? constitute gender discrimination?

Here is an insert: Some scholars tested 10,475 adults using the Primary Mental Abilities (PMA) and found no gender differences. In my opinion, this conclusion cannot be used to deny that there is a preference for question types in the college entrance examination questions that are more favorable to men or women. Because, as mentioned earlier, the basic intelligence portfolio represents the synthesis of a large basket of questions into a unified score, which does not rule out gender differences in specific types of sub-questions. Another point is that people's brain activity itself varies over time between adulthood and high school. Of course, it is generally believed that a person's brain activity and learning ability begin to decline around the age of 35, but it is clear that the highlight of most people's life is the college entrance examination. They are all bronzes that have left the high-gloss period, and there are still intellectual differences that can be discussed. The following is mainly based on experience. In fact, it is now generally believed that there is no statistically significant difference between men and women as a comprehensive indicator of intelligence, but there are differences between men and women.

Assuming that the above-mentioned bias does exist, is it gender discrimination to continue to retain this bias? Is it sexism to set different thresholds in order to reverse this bias?

Seeing this, I believe that some people are already ready to jump and say that I am anti-feminist. Although I can’t say that I’m all about feminism, and sometimes people think it’s straight male cancer (especially in terms of which one looks better in terms of my wife’s makeup), but it’s impossible to say that I’m anti-feminist.

However, it is not the first time someone has raised the question of whether the memory questions in the college entrance examination give girls an advantage in the college entrance examination, but in previous years (and this time it is destined), it is nothing to do, just like summer flowers falling on the lake up, ripples appeared, and then disappeared.

Returning to the above question, even if all the assumptions mentioned above are true, it is not easy to answer.

Because there is another topic involved here: what is the goal of screening?

From my personal point of view, the requirements for screening students should be different in each university, department and major.

Therefore, if each major starts from its own subject characteristics and produces a gender-neutral paper (or practical assessment), it is naturally the best. But obviously this can't be done.

Therefore, it is acceptable for each major to reduce the difference in scores that may be caused by natural differences caused by gender through various statistical methods.

There are two questions here: Does this method of difference subtraction conform to the characteristics of the discipline? And, is this discrepancy subtraction itself appropriate, and does it introduce a new gender bias?

Obviously, this problem is not a simple question of "is it reasonable to set different admission lines for men and women".

Therefore, the ideal college entrance examination is of course that each college, department, and even major has its own set of assessments, and then candidates are free to choose assessments according to their own interests and hobbies. But this obviously cannot be done.

So in this case, setting different fractional lines, if done in the right way, is also acceptable.

So, the original question becomes: Is such a fractional difference set right?

This question is too professional to answer.

But at least from my personal point of view, the learning of small languages and future applications probably do not have the problem of gender bias that needs to be compensated by the huge score difference of 65 points.

Therefore, the problem is now basically decomposed into the following series of sub-problems:

1. Is there a gender bias in the selection of subjects for the college entrance examination? If there is, is it more favorable for girls or more favorable for boys?
2. Can various majors and departments decide on their own the assessment criteria for recruiting students? (The answer to this question is actually very obvious, and it is also a white mention.)
3. Does the practice of setting different scores for men and women in each major and department is in line with the characteristics of its own discipline? (Or will the bias of the college entrance examination questions bring unnecessary or even harmful deviations to the admission of students who meet the characteristics of their own disciplines?)
4. Can the difference between male and female scores set by each major and department make up for the bias caused by the topic selection in the previous question? Has a new sexism been introduced?

It is basically difficult to give final answers to these questions, because the questions themselves are difficult to standardize, and the answers can be interpreted from many different perspectives, so whether it is fair or not can often get different answers from different perspectives.

In other words, as long as a system is complex enough, it is difficult to give a judgment standard that most people agree with.

The only thing that is certain is that if the starting point for the difference between male and female scores is not the characteristics of their own disciplines and the gender bias in the current college entrance examination questions, but only for the purpose of spoofing such as balancing the number of males and females, then gender discrimination is undoubtedly. .

Immediately, I felt that I actually wrote so much, and the final conclusion was a nonsense, haha.