Larry Summers' True Record on Women

Larry Summers' True Record on Women

Sheryl Sandberg

Larry has been a true advocate for women throughout his career. In 1992, as Chief Economist of the World Bank, Larry argued in front of the world's Finance Ministers that the highest return investment they could make in their economies was to educate their girls. Through his work, girls' education became a focus for development experts and a topic not just in education ministries, but in financial ministries worldwide.

I first met Larry when I was a junior at Harvard. A friend and I were forming a new student organization, Women in Economics and Government, to encourage women to major in these subjects. We told all of our professors of our efforts and of all of them, the one who helped us the most was Larry. He served as our champion and helped rally the support of his fellow professors behind our efforts. The following year, when I wanted to write my senior thesis on the economics of spousal abuse, Larry volunteered to be my advisor because he recognized the importance of the issue.

I went on to work for him both at the World Bank and at Treasury. At the World Bank, he was a tireless advocate for girls' education. At Treasury, he fought for social security benefits for women working in their homes, better enforcement of child support obligations, and an expansion of child care tax credits. And through all of these years, he was a supportive and deeply caring mentor for me and many other women who had the opportunity to work for him.

Larry has been attacked by some in the women's community for remarks he made about women's abilities. As he has acknowledged himself, this speech was a real mistake. What few seem to note is that it is remarkable that he was giving the speech in the first place - that he cared enough about women's careers and their trajectory in the fields of math and science to proactively analyze the issues and talk about what was going wrong. To conclude that he communicated poorly -- and even insensitively -- is fair. To conclude that he is opposed to progress for women overlooks the fact that improving this progress was precisely the subject he was addressing.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sheryl-sandberg/what-larry-summers-has-do_b_142126.html

:thumbsup: :D

That does not mean he does not have invaluable insight to this economic situation. He's a brilliant person, and we need them.

were that they were sympathetic to a real issue... not enough women in science and math.

Men and women develop differently, that's a simple biological and neurological fact.

Making mention of that will be a crime until people get educated.

Why do we have to appoint someone who was part of the problem to begin with?

Here:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=7829306&mesg_id=7829306

FDIC chair speaks out against bailout

Thursday, October 16, 2008

FDIC Chairwoman Sheila Blair is publicly criticizing the administration's $700 billion bailout package, saying it doesn't do enough to help Americans facing foreclosures. Sarah Gardner reports.

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/10/16/mortgage_fix

Audio:

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/www_publicradio/tools/media_player/popup.php?name=marketplace/pm/2008/10/16/marketplace_cast1_20081016_64&starttime=00:11:10.5&endtime=00:13:00.0

of regulation of derivatives?

If she was, I would gladly see her as SOT over Summers (who previously supported de-reg)

NO NO NO NO NO

Her involvement with Vikram Pandit's attempted theft of Wachovia is criminal, IMHO.

I think 'they' say: 'Not a team player.'

CHANGE!!!! Same damn Bill Clinton people. More Repug lites.

Thanks for posting this.

i think we have a HUGE problem in this country with how our males feel and treat females. i hear it on this board and am disgusted. what some did with palin was offensive to say the very least. i think we have gotten beyond the suppressing women cause they lack and now males use other means to do exactly the same

that being said

i read up on this man and i do not see any evidence at all his intent was to suprress females.

thanks for this post.

people oppose him.

He stood behind Phil Gramm in overturning Glass-Steagal, he was a proponent of deregulation and against regulating things like derivatives and against the inclusion of labor and environmental regulations in agreements like NAFTA.

so though i back of the sexism issue, i agree with you

not saying one way or another on this guy, just agreeing with you

know that I don't want Summers. In fact I already have. I spent months arguing against those things Summers was OK with and pointing out how bad Phil Gramm was as an economic adviser to McCain. I am not going to just roll over now and say those things are all a-OK.

Did anyone ever ask what Axelrod's other job was?

Our brains are different. Research shows boys are better spatially and thus better at math, girls are better at verbally expressing themselves and better at reading. I am tired of politically correct crap not helping us understand each other-we are not all the same. We are different. Maybe he said it in a bad or wrong way but as the mother of two girls I essentially agree with him. Girls lag behind math and science because their brains are not set up the same way as boy's brains are. Boys lag behind in reading and writing in early elementary school. I am studying to be a preschool teacher and all of this was discussed in my child development class.
I don't like Summers because of his economic policies but not because of his comments.

do either.

though i agree with the premise what he said was not "wrong". raising two boys i have come to same conclusion except my experience was different. my oldest son was not with "normal" and excelled along with the girls in reading and communication and still at 14 excels amongst contemporaries in those groups. i would often have to fight the two stereotypes in sons defense when others would want to put him in known categories.

also, what i have found is though they tend to these areas of comfort, it is not a forgone conclusion they cannot do. with a little more work in these areas that are "weaker" they can excel along with those that tend more to those areas.

my son just has to kinda work at math and gets a's in his advanced ap math courses. yet cause he actually has to put an effort in them, he says he is not good. with his other course, reading, english, social studies they come so easily for him he puts no effort and pulls easy a's.

Fuck that and the horse it rode in on.

at Harvard given tenure under his reign?

Maybe he just likes to help women only to a certain point....he doesn't want them to feel too secure at their jobs? Or maybe he doesn't want to compete against them...after all if a woman can do the same job as a man and maybe do it better, what does that say about the man?

Because it will infuriate the right. :)

With that said, Summers is a brilliant economist, but controversy seems to follow him. I don't like some of the things he has said, but the economy needs to be fixed. So what if it takes an asshole to fix it.