Men are more intelligent than Women!!. Claims study - by Gillie
JACKofTrades on 15/9/2006 at 22:37
Quote Posted by a guy on another forum in response to this study
... stupid men face an additional hazard to those faced by stupid women; testosterone. In this way, the culling of stupid people heavily favors men, bringing up the average!
This might actually be true.
Parker'sSire on 16/9/2006 at 00:04
just Googled it...
Women invented, discovered, or were primarily responsible for:
(the edited list)
-Windshield wipers (both hand cranked and automatic versions)
-Laser Cataract Removal Surgical Technique
-Geobond (fire resistant building material)
-Non-reflective glass
-anti-fungal antibiotic drug Nystatin
-Dishwasher (company became KitchenAid)
-Maritime Signal Flares
-CPR Mannequin
-radium and polonium
-Disposable diapers
-(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercaptopurine) mercaptopurine
-Synthetic (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeolite) Zeolites
-the Home Diabetes Test
-Liquid Paper (the Monkee's Mike Nesmith's mom)
-The Barbie Doll
-vacuum ice cream freezer
-The first compiler
-COBOL
-the brassiere
-vacuum packed canning
-oil burner
-square bottom paper bags
-Kevlar
-(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum) Spread Spectrum communication devices
-punchcards (Ada Lovelace)
-the (
http://www.pricegrabber.com/search.php?form_keyword=snugli&mode=y_us_s&skd=1) Snugli
-Pantyhose (‘Catwoman' Julie Newmar)
-Scotchgard
-“3d TV”
And the ultimate payback invention....
-the Catheter
Aerothorn on 16/9/2006 at 00:18
Considering the hundreds of thousands of patents in the U.S. Patent Office alone, I sure as hell hope they invented more than that.
Parker'sSire on 16/9/2006 at 00:39
Quote Posted by Aerothorn
Considering the hundreds of thousands of patents in the U.S. Patent Office alone, I sure as hell hope they invented more than that.
Of course, but SD (seriously or not) was starting to sound like men invented everything.
1998: Women received 10.3% of patents issued in the US.
1977-1998: Women received 6.3% of US patents issued.
Personally, I think 4 points, given how questionable the whole IQ thing seems to be, means next to nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Convict:
Dia we have to be exacting when criticising research and you can't just state it's not valid because you don't like it (not to say you are wrong or right - just be scientific about it).
hmmmm that could be a little difficult... she is, after all, a woman. :ebil: ...:sweat:
(but then again, maybe not...she's got a staplegun)
SlyFoxx on 16/9/2006 at 00:39
Lot of good THAT did her.:p
Parker'sSire on 16/9/2006 at 00:46
Quote Posted by SlyFoxx
Lot of good THAT did her.:p
you got it right there
Printer's Devil on 16/9/2006 at 01:01
Quote Posted by Turtle
If it makes you feel any better, women still excel at blowjobs.
If women didn't play the strumpet trumpet, the great men of history would never have been great--they would have been too busy taking their destiny into their own hands.
mopgoblin on 16/9/2006 at 01:48
Quote Posted by Convict
I think the glass ceiling is mostly due to women needing/wanting to spend more time with families rather than IQ or any other factor.
I recall a political science lecture about half a year ago, in which the lecturer showed a bunch of graphs of age versus annual pay versus sex. If I recall correctly, the pay didn't really diverge until ages around 25-30ish, but from then on, men get more pay until around 65, where it started to even out again. However, once people in part-time work or with children were removed, most of the difference disappeared, suggesting that while having children is responsible for a lot of the gap, there are probably some other factors in there too. That said, I don't recall whether mean or median pay was displayed, and I didn't see the data and methods behind the graphs, so I don't know whether they're sufficiently accurate.
Quote:
Dunno if the study is true or not but an argument against this is that girls do better than boys at school (which can be due to IQ and/or hard work).
It could also be due to the nature of the subjects and/or assessment. For example, english (in New Zealand, at least) is mostly about writing stories and responses to text and stuff like that. I'm not good at that at all, and I failed fifth form english with 16%. Since you have to take four years of english, I had to repeat it. If I recall correctly, most of the people in the repeat-class were male. Although I failed the exam a second time (17%), I did pass an alternate exam that focussed more on practical/technical writing (55%, I think), and I've had no problems with that sort of writing anywhere else either. Overall, high school does seem to have a slight bias towards creativity and non-scientific interpretation, which might be partially responsible. These days, there's also more internal assessment rather than big exams at the end of the year, but I don't know whether that'd have any effect. Could also be a change in teaching methods in general over recent years.
Another possible factor is the male:female ratio in teaching. There aren't many male teachers these days, especially in primary school. I reckon that gives boys a bit of a disadvantage right from the start, since teachers are probably the main role models outside the family.
Scots Taffer on 16/9/2006 at 02:17
Stronts: kicking it from the 1950's YEAAAAAAAH
Tocky on 16/9/2006 at 04:32
Regardless of validity of the study, THIS guy proved he aint that smart. If he hasn't learned by now that you DO NOT piss off women then he can't be very bright.
Also:
Quote Posted by the mighty parthos
Somestuffwhogivesashitcausehecameback!
Dude! Where have you been? I would have paid your bail. I'm sure at least some of them deserved killing anyway. Really, I could have pulled some strings. I know cops all over the country. Just check the NCIC. Okay, so they know me, it's almost the same thing. Anyway, it's good to hear you haven't been counting pleats on the inside of a casket lid you inconsiderate meatwad. Welcome back shithead. And thanks a lot for making me get all nancyboy sentimental.