Feminism now targeting: Mansplaining

a reply to: RedDragon

You tried to make some exterior point that Men score higher than woman on IQ. While this is not false, you're gravitating to this notion that it 'means something'.

That's what's moronic. You want to call men smarter than women, over an average amount that doesn't even carry the capacity for a standard margin of error. You could take the test twice and score 10 points apart.

You don't call someone at 155 an idiot because someone at 160 is 5 points higher.
This also means that someone at 100 isn't exactly much more special than someone at 95.

You can go-on to say that it's a 2 point average, but then this just makes your point look even more stupid and sexist.

Calling men smarter and women inferior over a 2 point average is retarded.

This trend also ENDED in 2012. Men and Women are generally accepted to score 'the same'.

a reply to: imjack

What on Earth are you talking about? What in the hell does a 2 point average IQ difference have to do with a difference in standard deviations?

Maybe this will make more sense



Notice how many more males with high IQs there are than women despite just the 2 point average difference? As you go higher and higher, men start to outnumber women ~10:1.

a reply to: imjack

There are further differences though. The IQ of men swing more wildly than that of women: at a genius level IQ of 145 men outnumber women 8 by 1...

So you think it's a huge coincidence that men have accomplished far more historically and far more in the field of science than women? Not very likely.. it's just biology.

originally posted by: RedDragon

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Annee

I wouldn't know. Female licensed professional engineers are paid more than their male counterparts.

Can you prove that?

I'm sure its getting better for women with degrees in trained professions.

Women from my generation simply had no recourse. But, women today do. And they're not gonna keep their mouth's shut.

But, there's still the issue in other type jobs. I mean, how many times has Walmart been sued for gender inequality.

It's much easier for women than it is for men to get into engineering schools, to get engineering jobs, and to get promoted in engineering. Same thing for programming.

The field is dominated by men because most women simply don't want to be engineers or programmers. It's very possible that there's an aptitude component as well; there are many more men with high IQs than there are women with high IQs (also many more retarded men than retarded women). This isn't a belief. This is a fact.

I think I posted this earlier in this thread.

This is Ben Barres: PhD.Professor of Neurobiology, and Chair of the Department of Neurobiology Stanford University School of Medicine

He supports women in science and talks about gender issues.

He has a very unique perspective - - because he used to be Barbara. (he is transgender)

Science still tends to be perceived as a “man’s world” (1), and women frequently face hostility in the lab environment. Ben, who was born Barbara, began facing these challenges even before he began his undergraduate career at MIT, when his guidance counselor discouraged him from applying to the elite tech school. At MIT, despite high marks in classes and impressive research credentials, he faced sexist attitudes from students and faculty alike. After solving a difficult math problem that had stumped many other (male) students, he was accused of having a boyfriend solve it for him.

neuwritesd.org...

Gender Bias Learning Project: www.genderbiasbingo.com...

originally posted by: imjack
a reply to: RedDragon

I'm specifically referencing that he says they're 'forced' to higher minorities and you say they 'can't get them', however their performance is always above average.

The framework of how you guys say it almost sounds racist. What's the issue? In our Company the Engineers are Indian and Iranian because America physics scores are low, and so are graduate rates, and people that live here are idiots.

Like I said before, even the damned Canadians are better hires than America Engineers, and you're trying to convince me the security is black out of desire for minority hire?

Don't be delusional. They hire black people to do security for the same reason they hire Indians to build software. They're better at it.

You're talking about VISA applicants. I'm talking about the domestic labor force and how hiring from that labor pool is tilted in huge favor of women and domestic underrepresented minorities. Despite that, women and underrepresented minorities still can't get hired in the amounts that men and whites/ Asians can.

They're not getting hired because they're discriminated against. They're very much discriminated FOR.

a reply to: Annee

So, you're putting credibility about gender experience into an anecdotal account account from a transgender (meaning very emotionally attached to this issue) neuro-scientist (wonder what his research shows on something he's predisposed to bias for)?

a reply to: Annee

So, you're putting credibility about gender experience into an anecdotal account account from a transgender (meaning very emotionally attached to this issue) neuro-scientist (wonder what his research shows on something he's predisposed to bias for)?

a reply to: Annee

So, you're putting credibility about gender hiring in tech fields into an anecdotal account account from a transgender (meaning very emotionally attached to this issue) neuro-scientist (wonder what his research shows on something he's predisposed to bias for)?

A female:male transition's experience is going to be so outside the scope of normal that it's an outlier you would discard in a data set. -- Or else your study would be considered nonsense.

originally posted by: DeadMoonJester
a reply to: imjack

There are further differences though. The IQ of men swing more wildly than that of women: at a genius level IQ of 145 men outnumber women 8 by 1...

So you think it's a huge coincidence that men have accomplished far more historically and far more in the field of science than women? Not very likely.. it's just biology.

The education trend of woman was based on discrimination not Biology. This is why the IQ gap CLOSED, and Women have rising scores.

Also NO, I don't think comparing an outlier to an outlier says anything significant amount mathematical expression of IQ.

It's like you make your point to entertain the notion women have not scientifically and historically contributed.

originally posted by: RedDragon
a reply to: Annee

So, you're putting credibility about gender hiring in tech fields into an anecdotal account account from a transgender (meaning very emotionally attached to this issue) neuro-scientist (wonder what his research shows on something he's predisposed to bias for)?

You have a problem with that?

You have a problem with a scientist that experienced the field as both a female and a male?

originally posted by: imjack

originally posted by: DeadMoonJester
a reply to: imjack

There are further differences though. The IQ of men swing more wildly than that of women: at a genius level IQ of 145 men outnumber women 8 by 1...

So you think it's a huge coincidence that men have accomplished far more historically and far more in the field of science than women? Not very likely.. it's just biology.

The education trend of woman was based on discrimination not Biology. This is why the IQ gap CLOSED, and Women have rising scores.

Also NO, I don't think comparing an outlier to an outlier says anything significant amount mathematical expression of IQ.

It's like you make your point to entertain the notion women have not scientifically and historically contributed.

XX, XY, more genetic material meaning more likely to have dominant genes for a trait, dominant genes causing expression of the mean -- bringing up low IQs and bringing down high IQs.. Having no effect on the average IQ but a huge effect on the amount of low IQs and high IQs. This was already explained to you.

originally posted by: RedDragon

originally posted by: imjack

originally posted by: DeadMoonJester
a reply to: imjack

There are further differences though. The IQ of men swing more wildly than that of women: at a genius level IQ of 145 men outnumber women 8 by 1...

So you think it's a huge coincidence that men have accomplished far more historically and far more in the field of science than women? Not very likely.. it's just biology.

The education trend of woman was based on discrimination not Biology. This is why the IQ gap CLOSED, and Women have rising scores.

Also NO, I don't think comparing an outlier to an outlier says anything significant amount mathematical expression of IQ.

It's like you make your point to entertain the notion women have not scientifically and historically contributed.

XX, XY, more genetic material meaning more likely to have dominant genes for a trait, dominant genes causing expression of the mean -- bringing up low IQs and bringing down high IQs.. Having no effect on the average IQ but a huge effect on the amount of low IQs and high IQs. This was already explained to you.

No. Your point is Women score around 'the middle' correct? Like a circle right? This is incorrect. The trend is they do not score low.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: RedDragon
a reply to: Annee

So, you're putting credibility about gender hiring in tech fields into an anecdotal account account from a transgender (meaning very emotionally attached to this issue) neuro-scientist (wonder what his research shows on something he's predisposed to bias for)?

You have a problem with that?

You have a problem with a scientist that experienced the field as both a female and a male?

Anyone who's been in a large company knows that hiring for engineering positions and programming positions is tilted in favor of underrepresented minorities. It's hard for me to fathom that we're disputing this.

Why this topic is still going? I already stated: "Freedom of speech"

Speech cannot be restricted

originally posted by: imjack

originally posted by: RedDragon

originally posted by: imjack

originally posted by: DeadMoonJester
a reply to: imjack

There are further differences though. The IQ of men swing more wildly than that of women: at a genius level IQ of 145 men outnumber women 8 by 1...

So you think it's a huge coincidence that men have accomplished far more historically and far more in the field of science than women? Not very likely.. it's just biology.

The education trend of woman was based on discrimination not Biology. This is why the IQ gap CLOSED, and Women have rising scores.

Also NO, I don't think comparing an outlier to an outlier says anything significant amount mathematical expression of IQ.

It's like you make your point to entertain the notion women have not scientifically and historically contributed.

XX, XY, more genetic material meaning more likely to have dominant genes for a trait, dominant genes causing expression of the mean -- bringing up low IQs and bringing down high IQs.. Having no effect on the average IQ but a huge effect on the amount of low IQs and high IQs. This was already explained to you.

No. Your point is Women score around 'the middle' correct? Like a circle right? This is incorrect. The trend is they do not score low.

Same average IQ, but something like 6:1 more 140+ IQs for men than women.. and the disparity only grows the higher IQ range you consider. Of course, you will also find men outnumbering women 6:1 at IQs of 60 and lower.

a reply to: RedDragon

You've clearly been in the field your whole life posting a chart with no explanation or title or any information of any kind attached to it on the X/Y axis, you don't even address it.

Thanks for the red circles though.

a reply to: redmage

You're right. But, no one's a 2nd wave feminist these days.. that is over.. now third wave feminism represents feminism so that is how we must judge feminism.. it's a shame they had to jump the shark. We could have made progress where it actually counted and still remained sane. That ship has sailed.. now we're locking at radical reactionary blowback.

And in my opinion that's exactly what's needed now.. I don't want to see grown men with hairy tits raising children.. The degeneracy has to stop.

Now a new synthesis born from a new dialectic will be entirely divorced from feminism.. in fact, everything about society will change.. fundamentally. This change will be as new to us as the change of the 60's was to the conservatives back.. In that context modern liberalism will be seen as obsolete and antiquated. An establishment to do away with..

It is that same mystical river that Hitler drank from.. stirring again.. another cyclical iteration manifesting itself. We are talking about an archaic revival here. It is up to us whether it manifests as positive or negative.. The last time it turned negative..

Who will end up with control over this river, this upheaval? The elites or the people? We're looking at a renaissance.. The end of the Kali Yuga.

originally posted by: DeadMoonJester
a reply to: imjack

There are further differences though. The IQ of men swing more wildly than that of women: at a genius level IQ of 145 men outnumber women 8 by 1...

So you think it's a huge coincidence that men have accomplished far more historically and far more in the field of science than women? Not very likely.. it's just biology.

NO. Society has a lot to do with it.

Rules of society expecting woman to be the nurturer and men to be the breadwinner and protector of the family.

Ever heard of the "plastic brain"?

We are an evolving species. The brain learns and physically changes.

Yes, there is a difference in gender. But, we have physically changed/evolved. The ideal woman used to be voluptuous with big hips and breasts. Today the ideal woman is slim and athletic.

As women have less interest in being the nurturer and more interest in academics - - - their brains will physically change to accommodate their new path.

How the 'Plastic' Brain Rewires Itself: www.scientificamerican.com...

Neuroplasticity: What the Heck is a Plastic Brain? - Honest Evolution: www.honestevolution.com...

originally posted by: imjack
a reply to: RedDragon

You've clearly been in the field your whole life posting a chart with no explanation or title or any information of any kind attached to it on the X/Y axis, you don't even address it.

Thanks for the red circles though.

Something like 2/3 of transgenders are depressed, like 1/3 have attempted suicide.. Obviously, any transgender person is going to be incredibly emotionally invested in anything related to their experience. So, their thoughts on gender expression, gender experience, etc. are going to be very biased and probably nonsense.

This is why you don't use anecdotal accounts in general. You especially don't use anecdotal accounts of extreme outliers.