[Turnaround]

http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/25/av...der-ratio/

Nothing earth-shattering, but the correlation is even stronger than you may have guessed.

As a numbers guy myself, I have a bit of trouble reconciling this graph with the fact that there is no significant difference between male and female average IQ. My working explanation is that it's an issue of variance: Men are the vast majority of the super smart and super dumb, but the latter don't attend college and are therefore excluded from this data.

On a lighter note, this is a tremendous asset to wave in the face of the "wage gap" and "glass ceiling" crowd.

[Vitriol]

Reminds me of being an undergrad in some Philosophy classes and pretty much all of the participation and debate was from male students. A few girls were in there who probably took it as a requirement or something, and they had absolutely nothing to say unless the professor deliberately grilled them about it... then they gave a response that was either clearly wrong or too far off topic to be relevant.

There should be a dotted line across that graph at around 125 on the IQ scale that says "Where the female brain breaks down."

[Dusty]

[All or Nothing]

Social worker = Sociologist

Touched on this in another thread awhile back:

(06-01-2014 11:03 PM)All or Nothing Wrote:  

When you look at the scale of intelligence in the sciences. Physics attracts the most intelligent people in society. Sociology is at the other end of the spectrum where it is intellectually deprived to the point where it has become a point of mockery for anyone who works in a respectable field within the realm of the sciences.

That affair was simply another case of physicists making a mockery of sociology for being filled with dense people who should have never been able to have any level of success in academia.

All or Nothing was right on the money.

I will continue to make fun of Sociology till the day I die.

[lurker]

(06-26-2014 10:39 PM)Turnaround Wrote:  

http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/25/av...der-ratio/

As a numbers guy myself, I have a bit of trouble reconciling this graph with the fact that there is no significant difference between male and female average IQ. My working explanation is that it's an issue of variance: Men are the vast majority of the super smart and super dumb, but the latter don't attend college and are therefore excluded from this data.

The super dumb aren't represented on the graph. It's a range from normal to about +3 SD. Your working explanation is close: 100-110 IQ men don't go to college, while the recent GIRLPOWER! (hooray) trend has made sure that women now vastly outnumber men in college. The demographic shift is in the normals: the smartest women have gone to college for a couple generations, so the masses entering in the last ten years have been the average set. They can't hack math.

[Basil Ransom]

Same thing for colleges. Female dominated colleges, aside from the all women's ones, are shitty, often commuter schools. Not so with male dominated schools.

"Sociology is at the other end of the spectrum where it is intellectually deprived to the point where it has become a point of mockery for anyone who works in a respectable field within the realm of the sciences."

Sociology is actually a very interesting and valuable course of study - it's just that as it is practiced today in academe, it is completely hostile to empiricism and science. It doesn't have to be that way, and when it isn't it can be spectacular and gripping.

[Slick Shimmer]

The comments are pretty interesting. A lot of people getting trashed for claiming gender is a societal construct.
Then there's the back and forth between white knights and science types...
A few quotes from "Sweden as a bad example"

Quote:

A naive reader may look at this graph and conclude that men are smarter than women, but it is vital to note that, on average, men and women have about the same IQ.

No, Mr. Olsen, a non-naive reader will conclude that women are inferior, because this result reconfirms what every man sees with his own eyes: Women are inferior and it shows in nearly every test result, whether IQ tests (women score 5 IQ point lower on the average), knowledge tests (women score even worse), income tests (self-employed women earn half as much as self-employed men) or car driving tests (women have 5.7 accidents per million miles, men only 5.1) and so on.

Nearly the only tests where women are better than men are tests that have to do with babies or cleaning, for example face recognition or sensitivity to smells. I guess you added this statement about “naive readers” because you are afraid that in the current climate and the current degree of femastazation of academia it’s wiser to not point out politically incorrect facts. After all Lawrence Summers was fired for completely harmless remarks.

Quote:

Look at the comments for more than a second and you’ll find a good amount of explanations for the trend seen here.

Yes, you can explain it all away. Just like Star Trek fans and bible worshipers explain all Snafus and inconsistencies away.
That’s what White Knights in science do, too.
“Oh, it’s not female inferiority, it’s just because X, Y and Z”.
Yet study after study comes in and it shows a clear pattern: Women are inferior. No amount of White Knighting can help you with that.

Cherry picking random “tests” in which women perform worse is a hilarious tactic; men also have much higher rates of dyslexia, why not throw that in as another inferiority of women?

I know that men are more represented at the lower ends of tests, but that is misleading. First of all homeless men do not balance out the billionaires. And second: Even the retards are useful and can dig a hole.

Women on the other hand (even the high IQ females) are nearly always worthless, and if they are not worthless then they have less children, hence are detrimental to the gene pool of future generations.

I also love how you have decided that facial recognition is clearly something only needed for child care.

Which I never stated. I stated that the nearly the only tests in which women outperform men are tests that are needed for baby handling or cleaning or similar. Women are designed by nature to be less intelligent (too much brain power wastes energy needed for lactation etc) and are designed to stay at home and do monotone tasks like cleaning babies and cooking.

So to clarify my statement: Women are not inferior as such, just as men aren’t superior as such. Women are SUPERIOR baby washers, lactators, floor cleaners etc. and men are inferior baby handlers, but are superior scientists, artists etc.

Women’s desire to sleep more, to suffer from scoliosis, to be more cowardly, to be less intelligent, to have weaker bodies, to have periodic belly cramps and so on are actually superiorities because they help women to be better stay-at-home moms.

[polar]

Not to but...

Can't find the source, but I recall an article that stated that women have a higher mean IQ, but men have a higher variance...so men make up the majority of the geniuses and imbeciles.

Of course, apex fallacy is ignored by feminists whenever convenient.

[HeyPete]

"Even the retards are useful and can dig a hole."