I’d also note that when it is socially necessary for one group to do better than another group, you can actually go further than simply denying measures to the “advantaged” group. You can actively disadvantage the “advantaged” group.

I’ve seen how this works in my town’s middle school. It is socially necessary to make sure that girls get better math grades than boys so they can get into the most competitive schools. College-bound boys are much better than girls at math, and it’s not enough to offer special measures to girls while denying them to boys. So, special measures are offered to girls, while actively penalizing boys by requiring them to do things that they don’t want to do or can’t do as well as girls that have nothing to do with math.

In other words, there are two ways to make someone taller. You can get the privileged person a box to stand on, but you can also cut everyone else off at the ankles.

So. Grasspunk. even if they know it, it is a factor they prefer to not think about.

Do these researchers believe what they write, or are they just going along party lines, or just writing what they want to be right even though they know it isn’t? Even if you refuse to believe in the effect of genetics on intelligence, you are at least aware of the existence of the idea, so you cannot be surprised by it.