| As she worked her way up the academic hierarchy, earning her PhD in pure mathematics, Eugenia Cheng didn't think much about being a woman. She acquired all the traditional markers of success—good grades, acceptance into prestigious universities—and continued onward. But once she arrived at the top, as a tenured professor and published author, questions around gender became difficult to avoid, especially in a field as male-dominated as mathematics. And the time she spent grappling with gender issues left her wondering what she, as a mathematician, could contribute. Not just based on her personal experience, but based on mathematics itself. Her new book, x+ y: A Mathematician's Manifesto for Rethinking Gender, which is filled with mathematical ways of evaluating existing gender issues, does exactly that. Though many of us associate math with numbers and equations (and maybe the occasional letter, too), at its heart, Cheng explains, math is about using abstraction and logic to craft strong arguments. And, conversely, math can also help us unravel arguments that lack those strong foundations. Like, for instance, claims around fundamental differences between men and women that are often used to defend the imbalance in fields like hers. These arguments can be evaluated as proofs, or mathematical justifications, and in an excerpt for Backchannel this week, Cheng shows us how. Step by step, she methodically pulls back each layer of the argument until its flaws are unequivocally exposed. It's this very precision that makes mathematical thinking such a valuable tool. Or, as she writes, "It's a bit like the fact that it would be hard to carry a concealed weapon on a nude beach." Ricki Harris | Associate Editor, WIRED |
