http://www.google.com/search?q=princeton+affirmative+action+...
http://www.google.com/search?q=berkeley+affirmative+action+g...
Please post your friend's relevant scores (SAT, GRE, etc.).
http://www.google.com/search?q=princeton+affirmative+action+...
http://www.google.com/search?q=berkeley+affirmative+action+g...
Please post your friend's relevant scores (SAT, GRE, etc.).
She must have the longest ring finger on the planet, yeah, that's it.
I don't think any of us have asserted that women can't be brilliant and compete head to head with men, but if you are looking at any field of expertise, with equal numbers of male and female participants, the top one to five percent of people will almost always be disproportionately men, consistently across fields, over time, and it seems to continue despite changing social and cultural norms.
I think the comment above calls into question the merit of your friends achievement, which will always be the result of affirmative action programs. It is well documented that affirmative action often (but not always) results in lesser skilled candidates from preferred disadvantaged classes (race, gender, etc) earning admission or appointments.
How can you say that? Do you know her or what she is capable of? It seems pure idiocy to me to suggest that every woman graduating from a premier science program is never achieving it through merit.
As far as bell curves and distributions, who the hell knows? People tried to predict housing prices and stock portfolios on gaussians, and they seem to work until they don't. You cannot project your platonic ideal of how you think the world works because it seems to and then handwave on outliers.