On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Business Week was quoted as saying:
> The first study focused on short races run by some 140 9- and
> 10-year-old boys and girls in a physical education class. At that
> age, there was no significant difference between the average speeds
> of boys and girls when each child ran the course alone. But when
> pairs of children with similar initial speeds ran the race again,
> things changed. Boys' speeds increased appreciably when running
> against either a boy or a girl, but more so when paired with a girl.
> Girls showed no increase when running against a boy, and even ran a
> bit more slowly when paired with a girl.
Because enjoyed yakking maybe?
This reminds me of the old story told about Johnny von Neuman, inventor of game theory. The other guys at Princeton invited him to a game of poker against his protestations. Within a half an hour he'd lost all his money and excused himself. The others pored over how the inventor of game theory could be so bad at poker. Finally one said "Of course! He wan't maximizing his winnings. He was minimizing his time!"
All these studies show is that women don't think running tracks mazes and the most important things in the world. Run the same competition with how fast you can clean the kitchen and see what results you get. I'm sure most boys would greet the idea that 3 bucks was a reason to break ass in this department with incredulity and scorn.
If a male economist wants to see female competitiveness, he should go to his two year old's birthday party and enter into a circle of mothers talking about how fast their kids are developing and try to defend his corner. He'll get cut to shreds.
And that's a lot more like office politics than running a maze.
Michael