On the question of "taking Summers out of context," see the very careful
analyses by Colin Danby in the femecon-l list.
Actually, his comments on women stem from _exactly_ the same source as
his comments on pollution -- the very weird world of Neoclassical
Economics. It is entirely a deductive pseudo-science which (in effect)
assumes that what is should be. So if there are only a few tenured women
in physics it _must_ be because on the basis of rational choice
individualism there _should_ only a few: to have more would be
"inefficient." (And the meaning of "efficiency" in neoclassical
economics belongs in the Twilight Zone.