digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Men Smarter than Women, Scientist Claims

livescience.com — A controversial new study adds another cinder to the fiery debate over whether gender impacts general intelligence.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • mcherm, on 10/12/2007, -11/+77Intelligence is a complicated, multifaceted concept. When reducing this multidimensional quantity down to a single number, the design of the test can determine which dimensions are emphasized.

    Furthermore, there are small systematic differences in the way that men and women think. These differences are smaller than, say, the difference between how humans and chimpanzees think, and they are smaller than the variation between individuals, but statistically, there are such differences.

    Combining these two facts, it is easy to see that a particular measure of "intelligence" could be designed which would show men have (on average) higher intelligence than women. Also, a test could be designed which would show that women were (on average) smarter than men. And if you wanted, you could design a test that showed men and women had pretty much equal intelligence.

    You'd have to work pretty hard, but you could probably design a test that would show that chimpanzees were more intelligent than humans.[1]

    What can we conclude from this? Pretty much nothing, except that if you talk about "intelligence" as if it were something linear that is described by a single number, then you're going to reach foolish conclusions.


    [1] - http://www.*****.com/wordpress/?p=1945
    • hammydude, on 10/12/2007, -53/+18Even if men may have the capicity to be smarter than women, I find that is generally not the case. Most women I know are smarter than the men I know. I find men are much more likely to be idiots than women.
    • jonathantneal, on 10/12/2007, -7/+27Men's brains, on average, are 100 gram larger. Men can retain highly loaded G-items, and they explain what a highly loaded G-item is. So, if you think those things are the important factors in determining intelligence than yes, males are smarter. It's not philosophical, it's not politically incorrect or correct; it's just their educated opinion. Let me quote from a portion of the article:

      "Despite reports to the contrary, I did not say, and I do not believe, that girls are intellectually less able than boys, or that women lack the ability to succeed at the highest levels of science. As the careers of a great many distinguished women scientists make plain, the human potential to excel in science is not somehow the province of one gender or another.”

      So there it is, we may be all capable, but men have these particular abilities. They're probably important abilities, and in modern society give males the benefit over females, but that is how mankind has developed. There really isn't a need to wash out the article by talking about skewed perspectives and chimpanzees, the article did a well enough job making those issues known.

      Most importantly, it does not surprise me one bit that genetics has played a role in our abilities. If science had intended us all to be the same, then we wouldn't be as different as we are. For some it's upsetting, for others it's beautiful.
    • Malakin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Rushton's analysis of the SAT scores only showed a difference of 3.63 IQ points. This difference could be from many factors OTHER than physiological. More females go to post secondary school -- so maybe more of the lower end males do not. Maybe some women are still nudged in the direction of being a housewife instead of an academic by their parents? I can think of a lot of possible reasons for this small disparity in IQ -- other than simply whether the person was born female or male.
    • brandizzle, on 10/12/2007, -16/+39Brantano:
      You are a ***** idiot. Not all girls like fashion and barbie dolls. Even if we did, is idolizing GI Joe and running around pretending to shoot friends with fake guns better? Many women play video games, and many more go online. Talking about girly things instead of being intellectual? Because holding fart contests is obviously intellectual.

      Women do different *****, and we think differently. However, unless you're smart enough to give yourself a blowjob I would suggest you stfu.
    • drshane, on 10/12/2007, -17/+4You can train most to do just about anything, but it will always be a white mans amusement park and everyone else is just along for the ride. (no matter how much they bitch about the ticket).

      I know how this sounds but there I believe there is always some truth to stereotypes (not just the positive ones).
    • sparkles, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8@Brantano

      It's more than a little ironic that the people who uncritically endorse these types of claims are almost always the ones who understand them least.

      IOW: Dude, no matter what some study might say, you didn't get any smarter just now.
    • ClassicJBC, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2For me, the whole argument seems silly, because there's no real point. The industrialized world has a lot of protections in place to see that no one is going to be discriminated against on the basis of sweeping, generalized genetic factors. Even IF, based on some agreed upon criteria, males were "smarter" on average, it wouldn't change a damn thing in the real world. It's only the unaccomplished and uneducated men who would try to rely on their sex's allegedly superior intellect to accomplish anything.
    • oOLiquidNightOo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11"Women do different *****, and we think differently. However, unless you're smart enough to give yourself a blowjob I would suggest you stfu."

      this was sounding like a mac campaign. i mean, right up till the blowjob part.
    • bcdowell, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3i think people aren't understanding what this researcher is concluding.

      If you look at the intelligence of all men and all women as overlapping bell curves, the two will be mostly overlapping except for a very very small sliver at the very edge where the highest percentile of men would surpass the highest percentile of women.

      So where does that put the rest of us? Floating somewhere in the middle.

      so regardless of the cause for the 3.63 IQ point difference in "men" and "women", be it biological or sociological or anything else, for 99.9% of us it doesn't make any difference whatsoever.
    • scoot87, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I think 95% of the Diggers would agree with the statement
    • Banagor, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2@brandizzle

      Dugg, just for the totally righteous rant you ripped him a new ***** with. :)
    • catoutfit, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5"Intelligence is a complicated, multifaceted concept."

      Exactly...

      Men have logical, scientific and creative intelligence.

      Whereas women have cooking, cleaning and moaning intelligence.
      But seriously: we're all different and each sex obviously has it's strengths and weaknesses. We should accept these differences, rather than go on about how sexist it is to say one sex is better than the other at anything.
    • webcrumb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"i mean, right up till the blowjob part."

      iJob?
    • PixelCloud, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8"Women do different *****, and we think differently."

      or rather..

      irrationally
    • Esstee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Spoken like a true realist!

      Then again, where in the life of science can we not organize to obtain our ideal answers?
      I personally don't know if men demonstrate 'more intelligence' than women because we have no set guidelines to determine or measure intelligence to being with. I do believe however that men go through life differently than women as a whole.

      It's an interesting study nonetheless, even though history demonstrates that men have ruled the roost.
    • sithmat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Just so everyone knows:

      The author of this study, Rushton, is actually quite well known in academic circles as a total nutball. His previous work involved suggesting that blacks are dumber than whites, a racist claim that had no experimental proof whatsoever (as many scientists later dispelled this work). He was ostracized in the scientific community for making his "cold fusion"ish claim about racial differences in intelligence.

      Now he's at it again, only to try his luck with sex differences in intelligence.

      His new "experiment" or really just a highly sexist and biased opinion piece is flawed in two very important and very obvious ways:
      1) Brain size has nothing to do with intelligence, as countless studies have already proven. Just google it to find out for yourself. If brain sizes were excellent predictors of intelligence, then SPERM WHALES would be orders of magnitude smarter than humans, and would probably have dominated every Nobel Prize category. But as any rational person knows, sperm whales are nowhere near as smart as most humans.
      2) Using SAT scores to measure intelligence is one of the dumbest tricks in the book. How many hundreds more of psychological studies do we need before we agree that intelligence != SAT scores? Google this one as well, and you will see that the way SAT tests are presented are biased against both non-whites and women. In fact, in studies where so-called intelligence tests were given to non-whites and women with the bias in the test removed, there were NO DIFFERENCES WHATSOEVER between men and women and whites and non-whites on scoring. And I've yet to read an article suggesting a link between SAT scores and Nobel Prizes, wonder why Rushton isn't working on proving that correlation first?

      Rushton is a quack. The academic community treats him like William Shockley in his later years.
    • igotdugout, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4It's true for the most part, although the average in test scores are higher for women, there's a very real reason why males tend to be much more competant than most women. Look around, males makes the best tailors, males makes the best chefs, males invented and discovered most of the technological advances/discoveries from the 20th century onwards. If you ask me, it just seems that women just study harder than the average joe, but in the long run they hit a wall while the males still got another few miles to go.
      PS. Most women got their job by satisfying their male supervisors/boss. Digg me down but it's a very REAL fact.
    • ljuvefreya, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@sithmat

      I'm tempted to argue that sperm whales are smarter than humans. They go through life in a fairly straight forward manner, procreating and eating and playing and sometimes arguing.

      I've yet to see a sperm whale threaten nuclear war or blow up its fellow whales over an idelogical dispute.
    • kurtu5, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@brandizzle

      Nice one, you pulled the old, I am right because if you disagree, me and my kin will take away sex from you.
    • matthewmok, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This is so obvious -- why would one need a study to confirm it....
    • gnomon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ljuvefreya
      I think you have "wisdom" and "intelligence" mixed up (not to mention you're assuming sperm whales have had the same opportunities for blunder that Man [or Wo-Man] has).
  • monarchista, on 10/12/2007, -18/+7I don't see any controversial things here.
    • DrakeGTA, on 10/12/2007, -22/+9This article is missing the [obvious] tag.
    • scott1, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10"This article is missing the [obvious] tag."
      Wrong website. Go back to netscape or somthing.
    • ThinkBox, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Women, with a braind 1.3rd the size of a man.... its science...
  • Kafro, on 10/12/2007, -23/+11Did we need a test to tell us that? I just thought it was obvious and we didn't rub there face in it.
    • Galestorm, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6We don't rub "there" faces in it, because intelligence is a fact of opinion.
  • noseeme, on 10/12/2007, -11/+7I think that the term "Smart" is completely relative to opinion.
    • aMuse38, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0there are objective measures- they don't always agree, however.
  • fiberspy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+65This is really going to get ugly when the two women on digg see this....
    • chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -13/+27it's ok, there in the kitchen right now ;)
    • standalonematt, on 10/12/2007, -17/+2Its funny - when I read this I jumbled the words in my mind and thought you said when "when two ugly women get on digg" - I was thinking I figured the ugly women were smarter becuase they spent more time studying.
    • aMuse38, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17as one of them, i'm just laughing ;)
    • aMuse38, on 10/12/2007, -17/+1sigh.
    • fauxXenophanes, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Does that sentence just devolve into laughter after a while?
    • kroneko, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1my thoughts exactly...can't wait to hear the backlash once some news channel reports on this article....

    • rkettner, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12"it's ok, there in the kitchen right now ;)"

      Ok... I guess these findings don't apply to you.

      "they are" or "they're"
    • chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -9/+6thanks for pointing out spelling mistakes captain internet, I don't know what the world would do without you.

      My only fear is others have fallen foul to the evil QWERTY and you're not there to help them... fly, fly away before we all fall into the an infinite hole of darkness.

      // jerk.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7it was a grammar mistake, not a spelling mistake.

      -lieutennant commander internet
    • mattyxo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@chris9902

      Considering the article is about intelligence, pointing out your spelling/grammatical mistakes when you bashed women (even jokingly) was relevant. Go back to grade 4 when we all learned about contractions - you are the kind of people that are failing literacy tests in grade 6 and 9.
    • chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2what a tool.
    • samk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"thanks for pointing out spelling mistakes captain internet, I don't know what the world would do without you."

      That's a run-on sentence.
  • CoolDude330, on 10/12/2007, -12/+3Now time for the sexist comments!
    • starquake, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Well I can use some after all those MacOS/Window/Linux zealot comments.
  • PigThief, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Yeah, I believe that women and men just (in general) have different skills; it's impossible to say which sex is smarter in general. I'm not going to Digg this, but I'm not going to bury it either. Perhaps men in general do better on this specific test, but not on others.
  • wisewaif, on 10/12/2007, -26/+11What? There's no proof at all!

    Women instituted Calculus, invented electricity and the electric light, created a majority of the world's masterpieces, and it was secretly a woman who created all of Shakespeare.
    • CoolDude330, on 10/12/2007, -8/+8Here let me add it for you,

      /sarcasm
    • catoutfit, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2and men invented:

      TV
      The Internet (for the most part)
      The Web
      the Car
      the electric guitar
      the aeroplane
      the lightbulb
      the personal computer
      film
      blow jobs...maybe

      whatever it doesn't even matter.
    • ljuvefreya, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'd love to see your reasoning for your theory of men inventing blowjobs. Really.
  • kingo55, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Aparently men differ in intelligence more than women. Therefore it is more possible for a smart man to be smarter than a smart woman.
  • gxcdesign, on 10/12/2007, -11/+7Men invented ESPN and Baseball...not to mention Monday Night Football
    • Galestorm, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4Hell, we even invented monday night ! Beat that !
    • ScottMaximus, on 10/12/2007, -12/+10I just don't trust something that bleeds for 4 days and doesn't die.
  • jeffreym, on 10/12/2007, -18/+8How can this be? I thought men's brains were in their penises?










    • EnoshKhan, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6No, but there is only enough blood to run only one at a time
    • CriX, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Is this a bug? Or did the guy just do a bunch of CRs ? Would be nice to have the comment code take out white space.

      And as for the story: Pretty lame. 10,000 more women? Bad setup.
  • anasazi, on 10/12/2007, -13/+8well this explains driving
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9no it doesn't.

      stupid people can be excellent drivers, e.g. NASCAR.
  • veggiemoore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Regardless of intelligence, she's still making me mow the lawn today.
  • KnightMareInc, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6boys rule girls drool
  • SuckItUp, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Damn straight! Wha-hoo NASCAR rules! WWF forever! Hooters!
  • jhuebel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Of course men are smarter than women. My wife tells me so all the time...

    Oh wait, maybe I'm misunderstanding "smartass"... ;-)
  • mister_llah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19THIS JUST IN! J. Philippe Rushton never getting laid again!
  • animaniac, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13I'm sorry, but they used the SAT. The SAT does not test intelligence at all. It tests how well you take tests, or more exactly how well you've prepared for the SAT itself. Any conclusion on intelligence drawn from SAT results is simply meaningless.

    The article also mischaracterized former Harvard President Summers' comments. He did not say that males had greater aptitude, but rather that while the means of intelligence in males and females are similar, distribution of aptitude is more varied among males. Males appear more frequently at the extremes and females appear more frequently at the mean. That is to say that there are more males than females that are very intelligent, but at the same time, there are more males than females that are very unintelligent. Autism, for example, a disorder characterized by a severe lack of intelligence is more common in males. Likewise the distribution a number of genetic traits is more varied among males, the most common example is height. Given that Summers had made enemies with his Harvard faculty, his comments were misquoted, distorted by feminists, and finally ballooned to exaggeration in the media in order to undermine his leadership.

    Full transcript of Summers' remarks: http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=505844
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7sounds like someone didn't do so hot on his SATs. :)
    • sigintop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Exactly. Even the Princeton Review says the SATs are a test to see how well you take the SATs. It's basically another way for a college to determine how strong your work ethic is and how well you study.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1how is it a test to see how well you study? i didn't study at all and i did quite well.

      i mean, obviously studying will help people do better. the Princeton Review says this over and over because it's how they make money. They tell people they need the class and whatnot to do well, and people take it and add a few points to their scores.

      but some folks do just fine without studying because the test is really a measure of reasoning ability. some people have better reasoning ability than others.
  • sprintmarathon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Snore. Hasn't the SAT been disproved as an effective means of assessing overall intelligence yet? Sure, it's used as a tool alongside your socio-economic background to sort you into post-secondary education, but as measurement for intelligence it is patently inadequate. These numbers only serve to illustrate the SAT's inability to see and accurately measure the multifaceted nature of intelligence.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3i did great on my SATs and personally i think it's a kick ass measure of intelligence.
  • jellomizer, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Averages vs. Person. The problem with society with tests like that is that people (of both sexes) tend to confuse averages with fact. By saying I am smarter then someone else just because I am a Male, it would be wrong. While it may be true that on average men are smarter then woman it doesn't mean that I as a Man am Smarter then all woman. It means if I am average Intelligence man then I will be smarter then most woman. But if I am below average intelligence then there could be more woman smarter then me. Or if a woman who is above average then she could be smarter then most males. The problems with this type of science is there are to many stupid people who will take these facts and use it to proove that they are smarter then someone else where in truth it has no barings.
    • sprintmarathon, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5Dude wtf is up with Your capitalization? and punctuation, grammar skills: you Must be, A woman!
  • standalonematt, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6OK, joking aside - this is just idiotic - If men did this study then I think that would disprove it right there.

    There are many external factors as to why Men outnumber Women 10/1 in Nobel Prizes.

    First there is an artificial ceiling - people don't expect women to be smart - therefore they are not given the same chances. It is only very recent history where it was ok for a woman to do the same jobs men do.

    Second, Women have kids, and typically are the primary caretaker. that would affect how much work they can do.
  • imightbewrong, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"but women have a smaller brain" ~Borat
  • pandapoo, on 10/12/2007, -9/+5My Predictoin: Guys *click* [Digg] - Girls *click* [Bury], log into 2nd account, *click* [Bury] lol
  • GrayOne, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5This just in; Scientists confirm the obvious. More at 5:30.
  • pixelfox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Different factors in the way human brains develop explain this.

    The whole problem with the statement "men and women are eqaul" is that they aren't. Girls mature faster and develop complex motor skills earlier than boys, for example. And there are types of problems that men can do faster due to brain chemistry. This isn't amazing, but feminazis and people who want everthing to be black and white make it so.
  • canrocks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6People, we have to look at where this is coming from. My first year psych prof had a huge beef with Rushton (author of this article) and rightfully so. His methodology is awful, and previous to now, he's been doing most of his research on how asians are smarter than whites are smarter than blacks. As if humans are so easily divided in the first place.

    The reason he has the name of one of the most prestigious universities in Canada beside his is because he did research on something benign until he got tenure and let loose with the mysogynistic/racist stuff now that it's impossible for him to be fired.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Philippe_Rushton
    • Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Just because you're racist doesn't mean you're not right. My own informal studies show that everybody is stupid except me, and since I'm a guy, that means men really ARE smarter.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4[half-kidding]

      "as if humans are so easily divided in the first place"

      ahh you gotta love political correctness as a religion, eh?

      i mean, follow me here. say you've got a labrador and a rottweiler. they're both dogs right? AND they're easily divided because any idiot can tell them apart. further, they have the ability to interbreed, thus creating offspring that are labrador-rottweiler hybrids.

      also, it is fairly obvious that certain breeds of dog are smarter than others.

      now let's look at human beings. say you've got an asian and a latino. they're both human right? AND they're easily divided because any idiot can tell them apart. further, they have the ability to interbreed, thus creating offspring that are asian-latino hybrids.

      also, it is fairly obvious that...

      [/half-kidding]
    • bgoodknight, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3" he's been doing most of his research on how asians are smarter than whites are smarter than blacks. As if humans are so easily divided in the first place. "

      Asians ARE smarter than whites. Jews are also smarter than whites, in general of course.

      Whites ARE smarter than blacks, in general.
      ETC ETC ETC

      I don't see the issue here? It's true.


      -Stupid white guy
    • CeeAyy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You have to wonder why someone would do a study like this. What would be the benefit of a study like this? What is his agenda?

      First of all, larger is not always better. What if smaller and better organized is better? (I am not saying that is the case... just what if...) Also, none of us use all of our brain's capacity anyway. That's like thinking a larger SUV is better when there is never more than two people in it to begin with. If there is an idiot behind the wheel the size of it won't matter. What, now you can add 5 more idiots?

      Also, identifying what groups are better than others is not useful for society. In the end science like this could lead to qualified people being shut out because "smarter" applicants are available.

      Identifying which individuals are smarter is much more valuable.
  • Portside, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3Great. Woohoo.

    Men and women think differently. End of discussion.
  • unitethenations, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8"But when it comes to Nobel Prize winners, he said that men could outnumber women 10-to-1. "Where it will really show up is at the very high end of the distribution," Rushton said."

    I assume that a great amount of Nobel Prize winners have higher education backgrounds (undergraduate/graduate), to date.

    Date of first Nobel Prize award ceremony: December 10, 1901.

    Dates that women where regularly granted admission to Ivy League institutions of higher education (i.e coed, not, for instance, Radcliffe):
    Harvard - 1977 (merged with Radcliffe)
    Yale - 1969
    Princeton - 1969
    Columbia - formally in 1982, although individual schools at the university allowed women in special cases before this date.
    Cornell - 1870
    Brown - 1891
    Penn - 1880 - 1890
    Dartmouth -1972

    So if these women, who wanted to "be on the Nobel track" attempted to go to the best colleges that would admit them prior to 1901 or soon after, they would have to go to Cornell, Brown, and Penn, or any other less well-known colleges with smaller endowments and less recognition (i.e less chance for research).

    (I am not implying that one must attend an Ivy college to win a Nobel Prize, I am just pointing out that in these 8 cases, women were not admitted until well into the 20th century, and around this time, women had less educational opportunities. Rushton's statement, is therefore thoughtless since you cannot compare two groups equally if they were not, at the beginning, taught equally).
    • ljuvefreya, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Even after we were admitted, women have for various reasons not followed those studies in great numbers. There's also been problems with silent discrimination at the various study faculties even after the restriction was officially lifted.
  • achoo5000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The problem with studies like this that even if the result were true (for arguments sake). Everyone would make the wrong conclusion based on it.
    Example:
    On average, men are more intelligent than women.
    Therefore, Bob is more qualified for a raise and higher position than Alice.

    It is not hard to see that this is clearly a fallacy but it is something many people might think.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Therefore, Bob is _more likely_ to be more qualified for a raise and higher position than Alice.
    • achoo5000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Did you pick Bob and Alice out of a freaking hat? These individuals are most likely not a random sampling of the population if they are competing for some high position! The on average comparison of men and women would have NO BEARING on these two individuals.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2"Did you pick Bob and Alice out of a freaking hat?"

      no, i thought you did.

      and if you didn't, what the hell is your point anyway?

      shuttup.
    • achoo5000, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2My point, little boy, is that if they are not a random sampling, which they aren't, then these statistics are not grounds for making any judgement about individuals.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1listen, Alice...

      eh, nevermind. the article says that on average you're not as smart as me.
    • achoo5000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Another common fallacy:
      Digg user argues for equal treatment of women.
      Therefore, Digg user is a women.

      I know you don't have any intelligent arguments to make so just crawl back in your hole. For the record, I am a physics grad student at MIT and I am male.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Alice, you don't have to pretend to be male to succeed in the present day world.

      There's all kinds of anti-discrimination laws nowadays to ensure that employers will have to pander to your sense of entitlement rather than hold you accountable for your gender-based inferiorities.

      And for the record, I'm captain of the Federation starship Enterprise.
    • nepawoods, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"The problem with studies like this that even if the result were true (for arguments sake). Everyone would make the wrong conclusion based on it."

      If people make wrong conclusions based on a truth, the problem is not with the truth or the study that reveals it. Misidentifying the problem to relieve its symptom only creates more and bigger problems in the long run.
    • achoo5000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I would have to agree, I guess I meant to say "it is a problem that people will misinterpret studies like this."
  • BlackCow, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2*sigh* We have already gone through this with another article talking about women being smarter then men. What I have noticed from personal experience in my school women seem to usually (not always) be smarter academically but everyone I talk to never seem to have there own opinions about anything or really do anything amazing, they just do well in school. Ive notice that guys (not always) don't always do as well or they only do well in certain subjects that interest them and screw the other subjects because they follow what they want to do. Like guys are more independent thinkers but they are a bit less mature then women academically. Basically what I am saying that intelligence is different but equal for men and women.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0i agree with everything you said except for the way you used the word 'mature.'
    • BlackCow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Women do mature faster then men. And remember that I am talking about my high school not really adults.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0it is indeed true that women grow their pubes before men, however...

      "In general, it can be said that feminine mentality manifests an undeveloped, childlike, or primitive character; instead of the thirst for knowledge, curiosity; instead of judgement, prejudice; instead of thinking, imagination or dreaming; instead of will, wishing."

      - Emma Jung, "On the Nature of the Animus"
  • katovar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Who Cares if it's true. I still want it on a T-shirt. ;)
  • BlueBoiks, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Does it really matter? 48% of America is stupid, example 48% of America think Sadam was behind 9/11.
    • SuckItUp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1And what percentage think the US Government was behind 9/11?
  • nepawoods, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5reality doesn't respect our daily notion of political correctness. get used to it.
  • blackjack75, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4This story hasn't been reported as innacurate. This is the proof, if any was needed, that there are less than 10 women reading digg.
    • ljuvefreya, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The story can be true while his conclusions can be wrong though.. ;)
  • Somniis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I've only seen one woman comment on this. Odd.
    • wobitnobby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm giggling as I read (and enjoying my post-graduate education, so if taking silly standardized tests is the measure of intelligence I'm in the top 3% of the nation).
    • wobitnobby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0After reading the rest of this commentary, I'd like to add that the simple majority of students accepted into medical school are female now and have been for the past 4 or 5 years. For veterinary school, the skew is much more extreme (5:1 female to male) and has carried on for longer. These are two of the most competitive educational fields in the nation.

      Plus, what they teach us in neuroanatomy these days is that though mens' brains weigh more, female brains have more frequent connections, adding up to a similar processing power, or perhaps just a better ability to multi-task or hyperthreat or whatever they call it.

      (forgive me, typing whilst tipsy after a bad exam, and never had that much computer background anyhow, analogy falling apart but I hope you got what I meant).
  • AoiTakuma, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2'A womans brain is a third the size of a man's. It's science'

    Anchorman
  • bgoodknight, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I think everyone knows this to be true already.
    BUT, it's very un PC, so people are going to mark it as inaccurate.
  • Swift2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Rushton is a well-known, uh, right-winger on the subject of race. Seems like he's branching out into sex discrimination now. The technique is simple: define intelligence as whatever men do best on average. Tweak the research if need be.

    Tip-off: he's the current head of the Pioneer Fund, the eugenics organization that was set up in the late '30s. Here's the Southern Poverty Law Center's description:

    "The 1937 incorporation documents of the Pioneer Fund list two purposes. The first, modeled on the Nazi Lebensborn breeding program, was aimed at encouraging the propagation of those "descended predominantly from white persons who settled in the original thirteen states prior to the adoption of the Constitution of the United States and/or from related stocks, or to classes of children, the majority of whom are deemed to be so descended"."

    The other purpose is to bend science enough so it gives the required results. One of the "required results" is that males are superior.

    Or, you can just label the whole idea of a free and open society that does not discriminate on the basis of race or sex as "political correctness," one of the most barren and anti-American political terms of the last generation, which means the guys who want to invent Nazi breeding programs are just fine. 'Cause they're not "politically correct," see? Ooh, they're rebels!
  • Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Men Smarter than Women"

    Define "smart"... It's very hard, actually.

    Taking me as an example, sure, I've found myself having a pretty good analytical and logical intelligence. But then again, I'm single more or less against my will. I've found women to connect to babies emotionally better too, and that's a part I can't really do that well. So... It's hard to draw quick conclusions on this, and I believe we're pretty even taking everything together.

    In either case, it has to be extremely hard to make some research on, given how broadly "intelligence" show up in society, and I therefore doubt all studies done on it. :-p
  • mustbepatient, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1One of the peers makes a very convincing argument that the conclusion is flawed: more females take the SAT test than males, so you are going to get more "marginal" participants from the female side. By the way, this same argument should be used to diffuse the argument that SAT scores keep getting lower (a ton more people take the test than they did years ago).
  • geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1You can debate whether or not the results were biased, but you cannot debate the fact that men have larger brains, this fact was pointed out in this article.

    I'm betting that these researchers aren't married or if they are they won't be married soon.

    I can just imagine that now, "Hey honey, I just discovered that men have larger brains than women! Oh and on average they have a higher IQ. Don't get upset. Your IQ is lower and it will take time to digest this."

    I know that I am smarter in certain cognitive/science/geeky/tech ways compared to my wife, but she has a lot more common sense. Together we approach problems differently and compliment eachother well. I can go off on a tangent like this message, if she were here she'd make me stop typing.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1"Hey honey, I just discovered that men have larger brains than women! Oh and on average they have a higher IQ. Don't get upset. Your IQ is lower and it will take time to digest this."

      hahaha. nice.

      "...but she has a lot more common sense."

      wow! you found a rare one! either that or your own common sense is significantly below the male average.
    • ljuvefreya, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0There are differences for sure. I'm not terribly upset that other people are smarter than me however. I know girls and guys who've joined MENSA, and you won't see me crying unfair.

      People have different qualities.
  • Makurosu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1HA! I KNEW IT! (Just kidding.)
  • robot1122, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1this is stupid; women aren't dumber then men. some are, and some men are dumber then women. actually, based on men's maturity levels, which i have seen in a lot of my friends, even if men are smarter, they do not use it. however, some women can be just as immature as men, but the majority of immaturity seems to lie more with the males.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1unless you've got a different dictionary than i do, maturity just means you finished puberty.
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1heh, i farted.
  • andrew311, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1As if anyone even needed to prove this. It's pretty much a fact already.
  • AlienFromBeyond, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1So, men are smarter than women because they have a 100 g larger brain? Wasn't this the reasoning used for why whites were smarter than blacks?
    • nepawoods, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Here's a question: If evolution made different races different in so many ways, what is the likelihood it could have possibly kept all races equally intelligent, on average? Not likely at all. But political correctness says don't examine the matter.
    • ljuvefreya, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The problem with investigating the matter is that for all the intelligence humans have, they've shown an incredible gift at abusing it for sad agendas.
  • JimNtexas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I hope the authors have tenure, because they'll get in now with this kind of heresy on record.
  • FazzMunkle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I say that we're all equally stupid. ;)
  • ideagirl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm not even going to dignify this article with a comment
    • Somniis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Then why did you comment?
    • Rapax, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Why? Not smart enough to think of one?

      *runs and hides*
    • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3why would a comment from you dignify anything?
  • Henaro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Now if only women could figure out how to get into the kitchen and maker me a sandwich. =(
  • whahaa, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0on average, women are 4.7% more likely than men to wash their hands after using the bathroom.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 72 of 72 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.