Women are now smarter than men? IQ results

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

Originally posted by Phenomium

Originally posted by Druscilla

The girl is always right, even when she isn't?

Seems to me, that this is the very definition of a narcissistic sociopath. There is a single word that could sum up the behavior of this type of female, it starts with a B, it's 5 letters.......oh, I forget what the word is, but I know there is one.

edit on 17-7-2012 by Phenomium because: (no reason given)

According to the article it would be "Brain"

LOL nothing.

The word 'Brain' does have 5 letters; (Good job, and you counted these all by yourself I presume?); However, this asinine attempt at a retaliatory retort, doesn't even come close to equating the aforementioned exposition of a narcissistic sociopath.

In terms that even you can understand, Brain doesn't equal narcissistic sociopath, therefore your 5 letter association of Brain with my previous comment is null and void, and just plain ignorant as a response.

As a positive, you did chuckle at your own response (which is the typical behavior of one who is intellectually challenged), so all is not lost. In the world we live in today it's hard to smile anymore, ignorance is bliss as they say. It seems to work for you.

It is mentally deficient retorts like this particular response however, that solidify the opinions of others...with the impression that women have higher IQ's than men.
.....unless you are a woman, to which you have just invalidated the whole theory of this IQ joke.

reply to post by Phenomium






oh... I do love it when inferior people try to insult MY intelligence with their little overblown egos!!!

Dude, you have NO idea!!!

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
reply to post by Phenomium

 

oh... I do love it when inferior people try to insult MY intelligence with their little overblown egos!!!

Dude, you have NO idea!!!

edit on 18-7-2012 by PurpleChiten because: (no reason given)

I was clearly thinking the same thing as I read your first response. I also have more than a reasonable idea or I wouldn't have checkmated you in my last statement. In case you didn't notice, I did kind of call your ignorant statement in my last comment. To say that I am inferior after I just mopped the floor with your intelligence would suggest that you are the one with the ego. I mean, you did just respond with yet another comment that supported no intelligent retort....and...you were the one who verbally accosted me first, it's the ego that perpetrates this type of acrid behavior. All I did was point out your irrelevant comment which was in no way related to the definition that I had lain out for the actual person that I had commented to. Your unrelated 5 letter mistake, that you thought was so clever, even so much as to infer it was laughable, is a supposition that I do have a clear idea that, although I may have an ego, I can deliver a cogent argument; Whereas you, having an ostensible ego yourself.....cannot. Why don't you do yourself a favor and quit while you're still distantly, yet still viewable in my rear view mirror.

Oh, and just a word of wisdom (that any child could have departed to you), just because you own a photo of Sheldon from the Big Bang Theory, doesn't make you Sheldon. Dreams are nice though, it's what keeps the world turning.

reply to post by Phenomium


lil fella,
You certainly have a higher opinion of your words than what is merited. If that is what your feable sense of self wishes to believe, there is little use in attempting to correct it as you are not capable of comprehending otherwise.
Go ahead and humor yourself, but others, who do know the difference, will join me in the very enjoyable laugh we will be having at your expense as you try to pat yourself on the back for chess skills while playing horse shoes

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
reply to post by Phenomium

 

lil fella,
You certainly have a higher opinion of your words than what is merited. If that is what your feable sense of self wishes to believe, there is little use in attempting to correct it as you are not capable of comprehending otherwise.
Go ahead and humor yourself, but others, who do know the difference, will join me in the very enjoyable laugh we will be having at your expense as you try to pat yourself on the back for chess skills while playing horse shoes

So you can't handle the conversation yourself huh? Have to go get your posse to join you. It's understandable, this is what teenage punk gangsters do as well, or should I call them what they really are cowards who can't fight their own fight.
Here's the deal. I cannot suffer your little laughing man images anymore as you have more of those in your posts that you do actual wording and it's only getting worse. Soon enough, there will be nothing more than just laughing emoticons plastering the whole page. It almost seems that you have a limited vocabulary and you are trying to laugh all of this off in a nervous attempt to keep the "conversation" going, without having to contribute any real usable content.

This is the last time I will respond to you because this battle of , uh hem, "wits" (Metaphorically speaking, it's really more like a hand delivered slaughter from me, where you keep getting up, running back toward me and beating up my verbal fist with your face in an attempt to insult me like an idiot-savant with a master skill level of emoticon fluency).

I can already see the future here, the MODS are just going to come on here anyway, and delete our conversation as they do not pertain to the context nor the paradigm of the original post.

Which is too bad, because this would have been a lasting testament to your cognitive lethargy and a hand chiseled epitaph by yours truly, on your vernacular headstone. AMEN!

reply to post by Phenomium


Nope, just allowing for any lurkers that are enjoying watching you make a fool of yourself. I'm just thoughtful that way

ETA:

It's quite apparent that the concept of the women being as intelligent as the men has many of the more bigoted of the gender in an uproar. At some point in time, you will have to accept that your chromosomes do nothing for your brainpower and you are responsible for your own success or failure.

There have been many on this thread who have attacked due to their bruised egos, and that was expected. When the only thing someone has to hold on to is taken from them, they get very violent, very angry and they attack.

It is time to learn to depend on yourself as an individual instead of depending on nothing more than what arbitrary group you may belong to. When you are able to do that, you'll be able to let go of the anger and be happy with what you have and who you are.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
reply to post by Phenomium

 

Nope, just allowing for any lurkers that are enjoying watching you make a fool of yourself. I'm just thoughtful that way

ETA:

edit on 18-7-2012 by PurpleChiten because: (no reason given)

.....and you say I have an ego. You have a rather extensive case of megalomania, as I have used you as a footstool throughout every post that I have responded to. You started this....I finished it....several times and your attempt to rally the troops to support you will most likely be met with a passive disdain. For any logical lurker will see where this conversation started and they will see who started it...they will see that your aggressive, yet futile attempts, to embarrass me by challenging my intellect, was met with a campaign of severe rebuke that left you in the corner in a fetal position sucking your thumb begging for outsiders to come in and save you from this lexical beat down that I have been administering upon you. Lurkers will come to the aid of no sycophant who has started a battle and doesn't have the brains nor the capacity of language to finish it.

Bye now, my verbal fists are bruised and you're simply not smart enough to walk away when you are being capitulated.

Here's an idea, get a dictionary and look up all of the large words that I have just schooled you with and you will not have to use emoticons to try to convey your dismay.

[That ought to keep him busy for a few hours]

You can continue your useless attempts at personal attacks or you can discuss the topic. Although you have been quite unsuccessful at your attempts of ridicule, you ARE disrupting the thread.

Now, do you have anything to say about the article or the statistics or are you merely trying to disrupt? I can see that it poses a great threat to you and you are angry and attempting to be verbally violent because of it, but how does it really affect you? Does the fact that women's average IQ scores now outrank mens really affect us in any way? Why is it making you so angry? Do your feeble attempts at insults really make you feel any better?

You are unknowingly offering a prime example of what happens when the basis of someone's belief is pulled from under them. Will this be a common occurance as it becomes more widespread? Will the misogynistic react with violence both verbal and physical due to their "lower status" in their own minds? Thankfully, their verbal attacks are a bit moot, but how will their physical attacks affect our society?

ATTENTION!!!!!!

Cease and desist......this is not a chess game....please stick to the topic:

Women are now smarter than men? IQ results

Further derailments will result in post removals.

Go After the Ball, Not the Player!

You are responsible for your own posts.

reply to post by Phenomium


Wow...that was like a sucker punch to the face in a bar brawl! If I was to have witnessed this I would have had the bouncer hold you while OP and myself taught you right from wrong! The OP was about women having an IQ higher than men...guess that just proved it right there...

Click here for more information.

I'm curious.... Who exactly did they test??

Did they just pick a bunch of random people? If so, the statistic is meaningless.

Unless they test all men and women in the entire world, the statistic is meaningless.

Originally posted by senselessness
I'm curious.... Who exactly did they test??

Did they just pick a bunch of random people? If so, the statistic is meaningless.

Unless they test all men and women in the entire world, the statistic is meaningless.

They probably tested one man and nine women, or 5 eighteen year old "men" vs. 35 year old business women. Maybe even pulled the figure right out of thin air ....LIKE MSN HAS BEEN CAUGHT DOING BEFORE.

reply to post by Phenomium


Well, like an intelligent man, instead of taking the article at face value I did some research on the claims which originated from "James Flynn", an emeritus professor of Political Studies at the University of Otago in New Zealand, who is also writing a book.

It turns out the OP's article, and the source, are a bit misleading... The way they worded the article, and left out important facts, made people think that all over the world "women surpass men in IQ tests for first time ever". Little do they mention that only in very few countries have women finally had IQ scores higher than the men in those same countries.

James Flynn claims that both men and women's IQ tests have risen over the years, but women's have been rising faster. However, in westernized countries, and Australia, men still have higher IQ scores, but only by a minimal gap.

These showed that in westernised countries the gap in scores between men and women had become minimal.

...

It included Australia, where male and female IQs were found to be almost identical.

The only countries where women seem to have higher IQ scores than men are in New Zealand, Estonia and Argentina.

In New Zealand, Estonia and Argentina, women scored marginally more than men.

source

In another article he states:

He found that when modern IQ testing began in 1905, women trailed men by up to five points. But over time, that gap has virtually disappeared, and in some countries, women are now scoring better on these tests than men are.

source

Only is SOME countries ( New Zealand, Estonia and Argentina ) women have been scoring higher... So, the title of this topic is... "Women are now smarter than men?" The answer is, only in some countries. I think that should be clarified before people go off in a women vs men battle in this topic.

Just to be clear, I think both men and women are equally intelligent.

Someone said on the radio that this only applied to women under 40. Considering how the NZ education system has been becoming more politically correct/anti-male for the last 20 years, this was bound to happen eventually.
I read somewhere that the bell curve for men has always been flatter than the womens when it comes to I.Q. meaning women are mostly average but more men are below average and above average so there are more male morons and male geniuses.

Someone called iphoney posted this after the story on the Telegraph website.:-

Wow... So this is what the Telegraph resorts to? You're so desperate for viewership that you stir up controversy by using garbage science? This is extremely frustrating... According to ABC news regarding the same story:

"Each country tested at least 500 men and 500 women, most between the ages of 15 and 18, Flynn said."

Guess you failed to mention that, huh? Nobody sees what's wrong with that quote? Really? Women?

OK I'll tell you. First off all ~1000 people per country is far too small of a sample to conclusively represent populations of millions of people. Any statistician with even the most rudimentary education will tell you the same.

Second of all, the sample did not involve "MEN and WOMEN" as your title says. The sample consisted of mostly people "between the ages of 15 and 18". These are children! If any of you can remember from your health class, girls at that age are far more developed than boys. Boys need up to a decade more to fully develop mentally and physically. Also note that even with their developmental disadvantages, boys still score much higher in math and science.

If the telegraph mentioned these things, then these claims wouldn't be so surprising.

Oh there's more (ABC news):

"Flynn has not yet published the results of his study, saving that for a book he will publish in September.

Are you serious, Telegraph? The guy is about to publish a book and you're taking his claims as science? Doesn't take someone with a high IQ to realize that [book + controversy - facts = fame x fortune]

I don't know about the validity of this one, but it does offer some interesting opinions. It's an interview with Adrian Furnham, a researcher of the sociology aspects. He says he looks at "perceived intelligence", in other words, how smart people THINK they are as opposed to how smart they actually are. He also brings in some of the societal reasons for differences such as preference given, even within families and how the confidence and personal opinions of one's own intelligence comes into play.


www.thedailybeast.com...

The opinions stated include:

Are men smarter than women? No. But they sure think they are. An analysis of some 30 studies by British researcher Adrian Furnham, a professor of psychology at University College London, shows that men and women are fairly equal overall in terms of IQ. But women, it seems, underestimate their own candlepower (and that of women in general), while men overestimate theirs. Furnham talks to NEWSWEEK's Joan Raymond about his findings and why perceived IQ matters

NEWSWEEK: Many studies show that men score slightly higher in IQ tests. Is this significant?
Adrian Furnham: Universally, men tend to score higher on certain specialized skills, such as spatial awareness. In the real world, that means they might be better at reading maps or navigating. Women score higher in terms of language development and emotional intelligence. But most experts agree there is no real, important overall difference when it comes to gender and intelligence.

But women think they aren't as smart as men?
That's the conundrum. What I study is "perceived intelligence," essentially how smart people think they are. I analyzed 30 international studies, and what I found was that women, across the world, tend to underplay their intelligence, while men overstate it.

These studies show that on average, women underestimate their IQ scores by about five points while men overestimate their own IQs.

There are more interesting tidbits, but you can click on the article to see those.

In the educational system of the US, it wasn't until the mid 90's that girls began to be pushed more into the fields of math and science, and of course it went slowly due to the teachers not automatically turning on/off those preconceived notions. With everything in perspective, it won't be until 2018 until we see absolute results of less bias in the educational system and of course that will also change as it progresses.

The present research is pointing more and more toward gender not being a key role at all and men/women being basically the same which goes against a very long history of favortism toward one gender. It will be very interesting to see all this unfold and taken to the point where neither gender is shown favortism with the data backing up that it's basically moot to look at gender differences at all.

There are some very questionable data techniques involved in some of the stats that are discussed by others including the bell curve for one gender not following the gaussian distribution, which is incorrect. It's also interesting to look at whether the curve is skewed to the right or left which brings in the non parametrict statistical analysis that is often overlooked by many.

I very much look forward to people being taken on their own merit, not on what arbitrary group they may fall into. We're heading in that direction, we're just not there yet. It may be our only possible escape from the land of "idiocracy".