[Kabal]

A study tracked longitudinally individuals who scored in the top 1% of mathematical ability as 13 year-olds ("precocious"). The two cohorts are those that scored accordingly in 1972-1974 as 13 year-olds, and those in 1976-1978. Achievements were impressive all around (because standardized tests are damn good at identifying talent, even at early ages), but the study found that even among this range-restricted group (those that were math-precocious as 13 year-olds), major differences in preferences and attitude were present between males and females about 40 years later.

Namely, even bitches in the top 1% of math ability as 13 year-olds end up still being pretty basic--and hypergamous!

One can also see that males outnumbered females roughly 5:3 among the top 1% of math ability at this age, despite girls being more developmentally mature in this period--another corroboration in the notion that males have an in-born advantage in quantitative subjects, and/or males have greater cognitive variance.

Quote:

Abstract
Two cohorts of intellectually talented 13-year-olds were identified in the 1970s (1972–1974 and 1976–1978) as being in the top 1% of mathematical reasoning ability (1,037 males, 613 females). About four decades later, data on their careers, accomplishments, psychological well-being, families, and life preferences and priorities were collected. Their accomplishments far exceeded base-rate expectations: Across the two cohorts, 4.1% had earned tenure at a major research university, 2.3% were top executives at “name brand” or Fortune 500 companies, and 2.4% were attorneys at major firms or organizations; participants had published 85 books and 7,572 refereed articles, secured 681 patents, and amassed $358 million in grants. For both males and females, mathematical precocity early in life predicts later creative contributions and leadership in critical occupational roles. On average, males had incomes much greater than their spouses’, whereas females had incomes slightly lower than their spouses’. Salient sex differences that paralleled the differential career outcomes of the male and female participants were found in lifestyle preferences and priorities and in time allocation.

For both Cohort 1 and Cohort 2, major differences were observed between men and women.

Job-wise, the men preferred more:

• "A well above average salary"
• Being able to take risks on the job
• Merit-based pay
• "A challenging job"
• Job prestige
• Using high-level skills
• Being able to exhibit leadership
  

Job-wise, the women preferred more:

• "Working no more than 40 hours a week"
• "Working no more than 50 hours a week"
• "Working no more than 60 hours a week"
• "Clean working conditions"
• "Flexibility to work at home"
• Flexibility in work schedule
• "Having friendly coworkers"
• "A stress-free working environment"
• Having weekends free
  

In terms of personal views, the men believed more that:

• Facts take precedence over whether or not they discomfort others
• Receiving criticism is not an inhibitor
• They are able to control their emotions
  

In terms of personal views, the women believed more that:

• "It is important to me that no one goes without"
• "Society has a responsibility to meet the basic needs of all its members"
• "I enjoy being part of an organization where individuals share responsibilities "
  

Although I would like to joke that the study neglected to confirm whether the sky is blue or if 2 + 2 = 4, it is good to see "obvious" things confirmed scientifically.

[berserk]

"It is important to me that no one goes without"
"Society has a responsibility to meet the basic needs of all its members"
"I enjoy being part of an organization where individuals share responsibilities "

Confirmed again that men who lean left politically are more feminine.

[PrimeTime32]

All of these phrases and quotes by the OP are the reasons there are more men in leadership positions. They are willing to take more risk, work longer hours, and believe that one should be rewarded based upon merit.

[ElBorrachoInfamoso]

Saw this study and was going to post it but you beat me to it.

Even smart bitches have stupid ideas about how society should run.

[Sidney Crosby]

If I was a business owner and had a business that wasn't in the service industry I would have a hard time hiring a women to do anything except answer a phone.

Women
-More sicks days
-Lower productivity
-Possible sexual harassment cases
-Maternal leave
-Using kids as an excuse to be late,leave early or not show up
-Women don't get along with each other
-Can't lift more than 3lbs

[ChrisPitts]

(11-23-2014 05:22 AM)Sidney Crosby Wrote:  

If I was a business owner and had a business that wasn't in the service industry I would have a hard time hiring a women to do anything except answer a phone.

Women
-More sicks days
-Lower productivity
-Possible sexual harassment cases
-Maternal leave
-Using kids as an excuse to be late,leave early or not show up
-Women don't get along with each other
-Can't lift more than 3lbs

I work in sales. The men have drive and ambition, taking the bull by the horns in the hopes of getting a bigger commission check.

The women, for the most part, can't handle anything tough without asking for help (from the men). They do way more socializing, almost never at their desks. They were clearly hired for their looks.

And yet, they still have the cajones to ask why they don't get assigned to work the bigger projects. Honey, you have a bachelor's degree, why don't you figure it out?

[Lemmo]

Wow, women's intellectual, economic and political inferiority captured in a single study. Well done.

[MattW]

The 5:3 ratio is lower than I expected to be honest. Great find kabal.

[Veloce]

Thread title 9.5/10

[Truth Teller]

What the fuck is "basic?"

Like it or not, millions of years of evolution have predisposed men toward better emotional control and pragmatism.

If you're fighting another tribe (pagan wars were notoriously bloody, by the way), and you start breaking down over something, you're dead. Really dead, really fucking quickly.

[Bad Hussar]

Left to their own devices women would fashion their work environment like a true bureaucracy, even if they worked for a private company. This is near endemic in Canada, where very nearly the entire damn country, male and female, yearn to be petty bureaucrats. And, no, I am not making this up. If being an entrepreneur and millionaire, or rather billionaire now, is the American dream, the Canadian dream is to be a bureaucrat. Understand that and you'll have understood more than 50% of the Canadian psyche. The problem is that, despite the hyperbole, Canada is not a true socialist state. So the majority of citizens are foiled in their dreams. They must work in the private sector. But when entrenched there they try their hardest to create a little personal mini bureaucracy. This is one of the reasons that nearly every significant Canadian company decamps to the US. Or at least their operations do. There are some tax advantages to keep the legal entities in Canada. Saying that it is because the US is a big market, and Canada is small, is just an excuse.

But enough about Canada. There are women who are "good at math", but as Larry Summers knows (to his detriment), they are pretty much never the best. Also, careers that require high level math ability do not really suit 99.99% of women's temperaments. Writing code (really writing code, not pretending) at google, facebook, or any major company requires a brutally abstract mindset. Of the very few people who have this mindset, none, or very close to none, will be female. You can pretend it isn't so, and hire female coders to make a quota, but they will not be doing the same job.

[berserk]

(11-24-2014 09:52 AM)Bad Hussar Wrote:  

Left to their own devices women would fashion their work environment like a true bureaucracy, even if they worked for a private company. This is near endemic in Canada, where very nearly the entire damn country, male and female, yearn to be petty bureaucrats. And, no, I am not making this up. If being an entrepreneur and millionaire, or rather billionaire now, is the American dream, the Canadian dream is to be a bureaucrat. Understand that and you'll have understood more than 50% of the Canadian psyche. The problem is that, despite the hyperbole, Canada is not a true socialist state. So the majority of citizens are foiled in their dreams. They must work in the private sector. But when entrenched there they try their hardest to create a little personal mini bureaucracy. This is one of the reasons that nearly every significant Canadian company decamps to the US. Or at least their operations do. There are some tax advantages to keep the legal entities in Canada. Saying that it is because the US is a big market, and Canada is small, is just an excuse.

But enough about Canada. There are women who are "good at math", but as Larry Summers knows (to his detriment), they are pretty much never the best. Also, careers that require high level math ability do not really suit 99.99% of women's temperaments. Writing code (really writing code, not pretending) at google, facebook, or any major company requires a brutally abstract mindset. Of the very few people who have this mindset, none, or very close to none, will be female. You can pretend it isn't so, and hire female coders to make a quota, but they will not be doing the same job.

I believe you, because Scandinavia is exactly like that. Trying to get something done is like a Kafkian nightmare, where no one will ever accept responsibility for anything. It's never their responsibility. The standard reply is 'take it up with the politicians'.

Socialism is absolutely evil.

[Dusty]

(11-23-2014 05:22 AM)Sidney Crosby Wrote:  

If I was a business owner and had a business that wasn't in the service industry I would have a hard time hiring a women to do anything except answer a phone.

Women
-More sicks days
-Lower productivity
-Possible sexual harassment cases
-Maternal leave
-Using kids as an excuse to be late,leave early or not show up
-Women don't get along with each other
-Can't lift more than 3lbs

Women also create a lot of drama and dissension in the ranks. They kill the esprit de corps with their endless bleating about "fairness."

I had a job once where I had to gather budget information from every department. The hr department was close to 100 percent female, and that's where we had to spend 90 percent of out time. It was like pulling teeth to get the information we needed. They'd end up having meltdowns including crying fits, and constantly tattling to my bosses. It would be "unfair" to ask them to defend or even explain the 30% increase in benefits they requested ever year.

[Sidney Crosby]

^ Yep.

They fucked themselves when they decided they wanted to "work" post WWII.

[RexImperator]

(11-23-2014 03:09 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

What the fuck is "basic?"

Thread title is a humorous play on words...

See: "basic bitch"

[Dusty]

I think I told this story before on RVF.

The head of HR was this very unattractive woman who was at least 6' tall and fat. She was an extremely unpleasant woman to say the least.

One of the budget inputs I needed from HR was the annual bonus. The hags in HR were suppose to have an excel file with the bonus rules and the bonus figured out by person.

They'd give me the total bonus budget number ( always late) and it would fail my sniff test in 30 seconds. I would challenge it, whereupon the HR gals would throw fits and say stuff like "why do you even ask us to do this if you don't think we can do it?" I would reply "HR is responsible for the bonus pool so you are the ones who are responsible for figuring out the budget but I can't accept a number I know can not be right." That would set them off and they'd tell their boss ( the amazon mentioned above) who would screech at my boss , and then I'd find myself in the dog house for upsetting them.

Well I eventually got a new job but I stayed in touch with my old team. They hired a guy to replace me who took HRs budget numbers without challenging them.

End of year senior executives send out a communication to all the employees " congratulations! We had a great year! Budget targets met! We're going to pay the maximum bonus this year!"

Well when they started doing the administration of paying bonuses, they discovered the budget pool was shy by a couple million bucks. Management had to eat crow and tell employees they couldn't pay the max bonus.

They ended up firing the HR amazon.

[mikado]

(11-24-2014 03:08 PM)Dusty Wrote:  

End of year senior executives send out a communication to all the employees " congratulations! We had a great year! Budget targets met! We're going to pay the maximum bonus this year!"

Well when they started doing the administration of paying bonuses, they discovered the budget pool was shy by a couple million bucks. Management had to eat crow and tell employees they couldn't pay the max bonus.

They ended up firing the HR amazon.

[Professor Fox]

Related:

[Phoenix]

Bookmarked.