More Smart Men than Smart Women?
For instance, at the near-genius level (an IQ of 145), brilliant men outnumber brilliant women by 8 to one. That's statistics, not sexism. _DM_via_ReferenceFrame
The tested mean IQ of men and women is the same -- 100 -- in a "standard" population. Women are also doing better than men in higher education. So if men and women have the same IQ, and women are out-performing men in college and university, why was almost every complex technology one can think of invented by a man (or group of men), and almost every feat of path-breaking exploration accomplished by men? Why are the best musicians, chefs, composers, writers, scientists, mathematicians, inventors, engineers, and technologists mostly men?
Of course, in normal daily life, there's not much real difference between a man with an IQ of 105 and a woman with an IQ ofLynn points out a crucial fact: it is not only the number of smarter men that make it harder for smarter women to reach the top -- it is the ambition (testosterone) possessed by the higher numbers of smarter men which administers the coup de grace.
100. The real difference only emerges as we rise up the IQ scale to the sort of level that the really top jobs require and as we drop lower down the scale - because men, as it turns out, have a much wider range of intelligence than women.
As a result, there are not only far more men with high IQs than there are women, but there are also, as I'm sure any woman would tell you, far more stupid men around than there are stupid women.
There is, as yet, no simple or, indeed, totally convincing explanation as to why this is, but while the abundance of stupid men has always caused social problems, it is the relative abundance of highly intelligent men that has caused problems for several generations of emancipated, liberated, ambitious women.
As a result, when these women get close to the top, they are simply out-numbered by highly intelligent and often ruthlessly ambitious men. _DM
The general conclusion: Proper methodology identifies a male advantage in g that increases exponentially at higher levels, relates to brain size, and explains, at least in part, the universal male dominance in society. _Nyborg PDF
So while women scientists such as Baroness Greenfield, Liz Spelke, or Nancy Hopkins may be upset that smarter women are not achieving top-level success as often as men, the truth is that nature has stacked the deck against them. Not only are there more smarter men than smarter women, but the men are turbo-boosted with testosterone.
Something to consider as the Obama - Pelosi regime takes the wrecking ball to ever wider swathes of American society and institutions: If radical progressive leftists attempt to generate equal results artificially, via executive order or bureaucratic regulation, how much more damage will be done to the infrastructure of economic freedom and prosperity? Just how deeply do our leaders wish to push us into economic devastation?
Labels: gender, IQ, testosterone
posted by al fin at 8:52 am
13 Comments:
Some professions such as used car salesman depend much more on personal ambition/ruthlessness than inteligencec & we certainly see few female used car salespersons.
Right. Used car salesmen depend more upon manipulation and intuition of how to push a customer's buttons. That is a form of intelligence, but not necessarily measurable on an IQ test.
Women are better at the intuitive part, but are generally not as physically intimidating or confidence inspiring on the sales floor. There are some notable exceptions, however.
As a female engineer I think it is far more important for a professional to be qualified than be male or female. I have unfortunately seen both sides of the argument, women that are incompetent getting promotions based on gender and ambitious inferior males attempting to hold others back based on irrelevant factors, such as gender,religion,or color. I only hope my children get an even playing field on which to compete where accomplishments are all that matter.
ee_ga: Yes, agreed. And that is what Martin Luther King Jr. hoped for as well. But since MLK Jr. died, things have only gotten worse, in terms of racial favouritism -- but in the opposite direction than MLK Jr. experienced.
In terms of sexual favouritism in jobs and admissions, things are likely to get worse before getting better, as well. And in the opposite direction as, say, Marie Curie experienced.
It is the job of independent minded persons to find a way to create a world where their children can go as far as their efforts and abilities can take them.
Every girl I know that went to tech always wondered whether or not we got in on merit or to fulfill some kind of quota. We always wondered if a more qualified male was bumped so we could be admitted, and because of that we never felt equal to our classmates regardless of our GPAs. We also often wondered if the guys looked at us and thought the same thing, my equality in intelligence was robbed by affirmative action, if it ever existed. The only comfort I have is in the bell curve grading employed by GT and the fact that I never got weeded out.
I guarantee that male engineering students in general like to see female faces in the classroom. It is a reminder of what the hard work is for, ultimately.
Where else can nerds so easily find females who appreciate them? ;-)
The problem is that high IQ women who go to school for professional careers tend not to have many children.
In other words, it is good for high IQ men and women to get together, pursuing similar interests. But if they aren't going to reproduce to replacement levels, it doesn't benefit society much in the long run.
La Griffe du Lion makes some interesting predictions on the same subject.
That is why I intend on having at least three children, even though that means giving up engineering for quite some time if not altogether as I refuse to allow someone else to raise my children. Although our inspiration for me to do the mommy thing came from the first fifteen minutes of Idiocracy.
But there is one more factor - I'm a woman with IQ around 150, and, well, I think men generally find me rather attractive (as judging by the amount of complements and attention I receive, the fact that i have waist-long golden hair and a DDD size of you-know-what). However - I have never been asked out in my life!!!
(excluding totall jerks, like the guy who opens the collge gates for cars, or some drunk outside a pub)
My IQ is nothing exceptional in my close family (I seem to be a proof for IQ heredity), and I terribly want to have children (loads of them, I'm a maternal type), but unless I find a way to get pregnant without a man, I will end up commiting suicide at 38 because I'm sad, childless and alone ;)
I think it is caused by following:
a tall man can date a tall woman, or a short woman, and no one will think it's wrong. However, a tall woman can date only a tall man. Even if she wishes to date a short or average one, they would not want to date her, because they would feel short in comparison with her.
Of course "tall" here can be replaced by "successful" or "smart".
So on one hand, with 1:8 ratio on my IQ level, I should have no problem finding a bf. But how many of smart guys would prefere a smart woman to a delightfully-silly, makes-me-feel-even-smarter girl?
By achieving even more than I already have, I futher limit my pool of available partners.
(a little example: I used to practice martial arts while at uni. Male students who saw me for the first time were usually very attentive. They wanted to help me, show me things, etc. However, their interest always evaporated immediately after discovering the colour of my belt)
+ natures favours not what's good, but what's good in reproducing. A woman attending university loses half of her fertile time. A woman can have kids let's say 16-42, if she attends uni, she can start only at about 25 (28 is she wants a PhD). And 18-25 are the most fertile years! Afterwards it's more difficult to deliver, more difficult to conceive, and after 30 the freqency of Down syndrome sky-rockets. If she doesnt get her first child by about 33, she probably won't have any.
This two combined give a little explanation of why in our society a woman who pursue excellence, sadly, gives herself a Darwin Award.
Any advice for me? If you were a smart guy looking for a smart woman, how would you look? (www.intelligentpeople.com seems a very good idea, but there is really not much traffic on that website ;)
@Barbara
I noticed this quote on the comment box as I started to leave my reply for you.
“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” George Orwell
So, let’s get to the truth:
Few would argue that men are visual creatures. I would suggest that this is a more likely reason for no man having asked you out during your ‘sad and lonely’ 38 years.
Despite your claims to be 'rather attractive,' with descriptions of your hair and breast size you omit your weight. This omission suggests that you're more likely to be a fat and/or obese. Your enormous breast size would also suggest that you may be carrying a large natural underwire (read gut). Sure you may be pretty but if you’re not being asked out it’s also likely that you’re pretty large.
The fact that no man has asked you out AT ALL suggests that you're not only on the pretty large side but probably on the very large side. Maybe 50+ pounds overweight?
You go on to tell us that the drunks and 'losers' contemplated you as a booty call but even then you have failed to mate. Of course you could try dating the black guys from the inner city as they are quite forgiving of ‘larger’ ladies.
Let’s get to the advice that you requested.
Perhaps you should join the gym and shed some of those excess pounds. After some weight loss you may find someone willing to service you.
For fairness sake Let us assume that you’re not fat for a moment:
When you were practising martial arts you had boys fawning over you. You were at university then. You now claim to be 38 years old so that was probably about 15 years ago yet you rationalise your current solitude and romantic failure with the argument with that tall women can only date a tall man scenario. Whilst this appears rational it's probably smoke. Why?
Hot chicks can date either tall or short men, fat men, thin men, hairy or bald, smart or stupid. If you were 'hot' instead of delusional you would have greater success with men of all calibers.
Why don't you work on your ‘hotness’ rather than rationalizing your failure to mate on your alleged IQ? I do say’ alleged’ IQ deliberately. Why you may ask?
Although spelling ability is not proof of high IQ it is indicative. The frequency of errors in your comment suggests you’re ‘quite the story teller’ in regards to you IQ claims.
I hope my advice helps
@Barbara
I noticed this quote on the comment box as I started to leave my reply for you.
“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” George Orwell
So, let’s get to the truth:
Few would argue that men are visual creatures. I would suggest that this is a more likely reason for no man having asked you out during your ‘sad and lonely’ 38 years.
Despite your claims to be 'rather attractive,' with descriptions of your hair and breast size you omit your weight. This omission suggests that you're more likely to be a fat and/or obese. Your enormous breast size would also suggest that you may be carrying a large natural underwire (read gut). Sure you may be pretty but if you’re not being asked out it’s also likely that you’re pretty large.
The fact that no man has asked you out AT ALL suggests that you're not only on the pretty large side but probably on the very large side. Maybe 50+ pounds overweight?
You go on to tell us that the drunks and 'losers' contemplated you as a booty call but even then you have failed to mate. Of course you could try dating the black guys from the inner city as they are quite forgiving of ‘larger’ ladies.
Let’s get to the advice that you requested.
Perhaps you should join the gym and shed some of those excess pounds. After some weight loss you may find someone willing to service you.
For fairness sake Let us assume that you’re not fat for a moment:
When you were practising martial arts you had boys fawning over you. You were at university then. You now claim to be 38 years old so that was probably about 15 years ago yet you rationalise your current solitude and romantic failure with the argument with that tall women can only date a tall man scenario. Whilst this appears rational it's probably smoke. Why?
Hot chicks can date either tall or short men, fat men, thin men, hairy or bald, smart or stupid. If you were 'hot' instead of delusional you would have greater success with men of all calibers.
Why don't you work on your ‘hotness’ rather than rationalizing your failure to mate on your alleged IQ? I do say’ alleged’ IQ deliberately. Why you may ask?
Although spelling ability is not proof of high IQ it is indicative. The frequency of errors in your comment suggests you’re ‘quite the story teller’ in regards to you IQ claims.
I hope my advice helps
It is a truth universally acknowledged that everyone airing their frustrations over the net is a sorry creature - either a fat, spotty virgin-boy living with his mum, or an ugly whale ;) because normal people have better things to do than argue with unimportant strangers, i.e. enjoying their life.
And this is perfectly true.
I wrote this comment when I was upset after ending a 5-years long relationship. Luckily, my romantic situation has changed rather a lot since then :P
Therefore I will not try to persuade you that I really am attractive, or that I really am smart :P (only a little note on my spelling – English is not my first language)
Unfortunately my observations still hold - modern society favours multiplication of dumb slots.
On the optimistic note – the mind will always find a way.
1.Although men are not too keen on taking risk of hitting on smart, attractive, successful and independent women, it is very easy for such women to seduce a man while keeping him convinced that it's him who is doing the seducing, being all manly and dominant ;)
2.A smart woman would eventually realise, that brilliance and charm make men propose only in old movies. What makes man desperate to secure a particular partner in marriage is, unfortunately, far more primitive, but evolutionally very sound – so called beauty and sexiness, which comes down to the appearance of fertility. It will not take smart woman a lot of research to find out this are: signs of youth, health and high oestrogen level; all easy to either achieve or fake (i.e. accentuate waist – waist is far more important than breast, even though men will “say” otherwise, because it's a better indicator of oestrogen level; smooth and light skin, shiny hair... This is not a place to discuss secondary gender characteristics and their importance, though)
3.Smart women will use their considerable knowledge of chemistry and biology (or will quickly obtain some ;) to achieve amazing results in cosmetology (see previous point) without spending much time and money (usually they can afford to spend money, but not time. They have better things to do ;)
4.Smart women will screw the fashion, as contraindicative.
5.The problem with sapiosexuality is that unmanly smart men will seem equally attractive as manly smart men. However, a smart women will eventually discover that trying to build a relationship with an unmanly smart guy is a waste of effort, and concentrate on manly smart guys. This is very unfortunate, but human relationships still depend on too many primitive factors.
6.Causing a manly smart guy to dump his dumb girlfriend might seem unethical. But who can really tell? Perhaps he would have dumped her anyway? Statistics show that it would have lasted 3 years maximum anyway. And from the point of view of society's interests, that nasty smart girl is doing everyone a favour ;) A bit of Nietzsche will help smart woman survive ;)
7.If all fails, and time has run too short, there is still possibility of hiring a foster mother (especially after European governments will be forced to cut those absurd benefits) or hope for artificial uterus appearing in reasonable future (or constructing one if needed).
One more note of personal nature – America is not the whole world, and therefore it's dumb to presume its absurdities are dominant everywhere. Obesity rate in USA is 32%, so it's a fair chance that an American met on the net will be obese. However, in continental Europe obesity rate is about 7-9% of population, depending on a country (with ignoble exception of UK), and it is rarely so extreme, which means chances that an European woman is a disgusting whale are rather low. I'm from the old continent ;) I know it's silly to point this out, but my waist size is about 64 cm/25 inches. Never had any spare pounds at all, sorry ;) And I was 28 when writing the previous post ;) The number 38 was an example.
Most men are forced to slum with women of lower IQ.
Being an intelligent woman with a 150 IQ you could be more grateful.
Your chance of meeting an intelligent male of similar or higher IQ is 8 times more likely than the chances of a man meeting a woman of high IQ.
Just imagine if you were a dyke? You would really be frustrated finding an intelligent mate then.
I am pleased that you used the spell check this time.
:)
Post a Comment
“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” _George Orwell
<< Home