Are men smarter than women? (merged)

[beatbeat]

okay, I know this is totally serious discussion, and I don't mean to take away from that. But at this juncture, I can't help think of that old joke:
Why are women so bad at spatial relationships?
Because their whole lives, they're told that this:
_________________________
measures six inches. No wonder we're confused.

 

[Catch-22]

Hey, how did you know my secret, beatbeat?
Okay...
My two previous posts have focused on relationship issues for people at the highest levels of intelligence. I believe that true equality exists between genders and races. Let me again make it clear that I do not think intelligence has much to do with choice of profession or academic performance. I think intelligent people seek out challenges and they are drawn to what holds their interests when it comes to exploring themselves and their abilities.
Some questions for the people involved in this discussion:

• Do you think that some people can actually be more intelligent than other people? Not just a matter of perception or the result of flawed measurements, but the existence of proof (that is acceptable to you) that a given person is more intelligent than other people.
• If so, what factors made that intelligent person the way s/he is? (Do you think it has more to do with science or environmental causes?)

My answers:
I believe that intelligence is discernable and that groups of people can be considered "more intelligent" than the general population. And, focusing on the people at the highest levels of intelligence, I think the reason for the difference has far more to do with science than conceptual bias or environmental concerns.
Conceptual bias:
My first suspicion many years ago was that there was a bias in standardized tests. I set out to explore this hypothesis for myself. I have probably been administered more intelligence tests than anyone else on this thread. I even provided some early critiques to people who were trying to design a new type of bias-free intelligence tests. I have also taken intelligence tests supposedly biased against white males. I went into these experiences hoping to find that existing tests were flawed and improved tests could be designed. (It is important to note that even established tests are not full proof and have some degree of error associated with them.) My personal experiences, however, showed that the existing tests were not biased and "improved" tests did not change anything.
Environmental differences:
Next I considered that maybe encouragement or discourage from the environment could play a role in intelligence. People with an excess of confidence might perform better under certain situations. So where did this confidence come from? Was it the result of a supportive environment? Can a hostile environment squelch confidence and hinder the development of intelligence? One cannot ignore the fact that highly intelligent people become aware very early in the game that they are different from the norm. This aspect has to be considered when assessing how an intelligent person can be impacted by society. The encouragement of fifty other people will mean less to a highly intelligent child than being able to complete a difficult goal they set for themselves. Not only do they tend to be indifferent to praise but intelligent people are also often indifferent to criticism. I fully agree that women are unfairly treated by society in a variety of ways. But is any of this treatment harmful to the development of their intelligence? No, because intelligent people already torture themselves by testing the limit of their abilities and relishing the opportunity to respond to real or perceived adversity.
Science:
With all that said, right now I am working under the hypothesis that genetics/biology/science plays the largest part in the formation of intelligence. Because where do intelligent people come from? I don't think they are artificially generated by severely flawed tests. I don't see how they are either entirely created or destroyed by their environment. Five years from now I might have other opinions, but right now I am exploring science as the cause for differences.
General comments about this thread:
I think everyone has been keeping this thread at a high level. I regret that I only have a limited amount of time to devote to this discussion. If someone is posting to specifically discuss something I have said, use my name and direct your comments to me so your intentions are clear. Also, I do not presume that anything I have written will be "new information" to anyone who has already considered this question. You can also correctly assume that I am familiar with the different thoughts and perspectives that other people have presented so far on this thread.
This is an exchange of ideas and it provides a beneficial challenge for us to explain why we hold certain opinions. I accept that other people will disagree with me. That does not mean those people have more expertise or a more sophisticated understanding of the topic. This thread is to discuss the issue, share experiences and pose questions of each other. No one is the teacher and no one is the student.

 

[fizzygirl]

The encouragement of fifty other people will mean less to a highly intelligent child than being able to complete a difficult goal they set for themselves.
It's not that it means less. It does depend on the type of situation we are talking about. If it's an audience or observer type situation, then the following holds: If people are secure in that which they are doing, having people around them actually encourages them to do better. If people are not secure or good at a task, then having observers hinders them. Experts feed on audiences and observers.
It has been shown though, that in some cases people tend to brush off what is said to them. It tends to happen in those cases where people would see an underlying reason for the comment/encouragement. Studies have shown that when African Americans are given feedback, and it is bad feedback, they brush it off b/c they are assuming that it is b/c of the stereotypes. Likewise though, if they are given good feedback they do not give this feedback proper credit either. So, this happens in other areas than intelligent/non-intelligent people.
Another factor that has developed that has been shown to have an effect on performance on tests of intelligence and school performance is stereotype threat. If people are in a group that are the subject of a certain stereotype (women in math classes), and are placed in a situation where they are told that this situation often produces different results for their group and others (that there is a stereotype role), the fact that they may be ruminating on this role could cause them to do worse. The studies contrast this in situations where the people do not have the perception of differences (even with the same tests). I feel this is one of the most valid reasons for differences on a lot of standardized tests, and for grades in school (overall) with minorities. They have found less of this difference with black students at HBCU's than black students at universities that are of a white majority.
RE: the supportive environment. I don't think that most people who are referring to encouragement being the factor mean supportive as much as they mean making the environment a nurturing one. Having enriching activities, etc. Children that have books in the home, more visual and auditory stimulation, etc as opposed to saying "oh way to go". The highly intelligent child most likely would not have the idea of setting these intense goals for themselves were it not to be modeled and reinforced. Of course, it's really hard to conclusively know any of these things as we cannot take the nurture out, or the nature.

 

[fairnymph]

If people are in a group that are the subject of a certain stereotype (women in math classes), and are placed in a situation where they are told that this situation often produces different results for their group and others (that there is a stereotype role), the fact that they may be ruminating on this role could cause them to do worse.
Excellent point about self-fulfilling prophecies.

 

[Cyberneticdarkspawn]

Well for one thing you could theorize, and actually this information has been corroborated with results of studies that were broadcasted on a the news like a year ago sometime. I believe that they mentioned chronic dieting and or constant malnutrition damages memory. Enter in self imposed anorexia nervosa many women force upon themselves and some womens meddlesome mothers concerned with maintaining adherence to the status quo, and since the viewpoints of the fitness conscious culture which is reinforced by the influence of the entertainment industry, and the media is so prevalent nowadays, and superficiality encouraged regarding peoples bodies--their incessant fixation on their appearances--it isn't hard to logically deduce that the vast majority of women diet constantly and this has had adverse permanent effects upon their memory function that may be irreversible, maybe this is one reason women may on average have lower intellects in relative comparison to many men.
Men don't have to diet chronically usually to remain phhysically fit because they naturally have faster metabolisms because of the higher level of muscle composition distributed in higher proportions across their bodies. Which is because of the testosterone, and othe hormonal differences. Also unfortuantely it is a patriacharchally dominated society so mens opinions of womens beauty is constructed by their beliefs predominantly, this means added pressure on women to look good since they are young, and chronic dieting that begins at a very early age for alot of women, this results in increasing accumulative memory loss over a prolonged period of time.
Also on average men have larger heads, I'm prety sure I read somewhere they found a linking correlation between the size of a person head, and their inherent intellect levels being superior to the median average.
I personally hate to admit it but for intellectual conversations I sometimes find conversing with certain men more mentally stimulating than with my girlfriend.
She isn't too much of an abstract thinker, but maybe thats why I like her, you know opposites attracting and all.

 

[Infinite Jest]

^^^^^^
actually, most women aren't dieting (even those who claim to be). If you want references, I can find em when I get to work tomorrow (I'm a researcher for an organisation dedicated to improving health and fitness).
back on topic:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If people are in a group that are the subject of a certain stereotype (women in math classes), and are placed in a situation where they are told that this situation often produces different results for their group and others (that there is a stereotype role), the fact that they may be ruminating on this role could cause them to do worse.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excellent point about self-fulfilling prophecies
It's not just if you tell the learners, either. If you tell teachers that a given group of students are of above average ability, and another group of below average, their future performances and grades will reflect those predictions, even if the two groups were of identical ability to start with (Fizzygirl, who did that work? Seligman? My brain's blank).
Catch-22 said that many of his male friends were disappointed that they couldn't find girlfriends who were intelligent enough for them. Could it not also be that they are overstating their own intelligence? And could it not be that women, socialised to be agreeable and defer to men, might even play down their intelligence? Believing that appearing too intelligent is threatening to men?
Anecdotal support for that: my last girlfriend was of roughly similar intelligence to me (maybe a little more, maybe a little less). But if I ever mentioned something that she didn't know about, she'd come out with something like 'I know nothing' in a quiet, almost childish voice. I know very few men who feel the need to play down their own intelligence.
Anecdotal #2: "I think...therefore, I'm single" - forget who said that (female, obviously).
Great, great topics in this thread by the way.

 

[Catch-22]

Just a quick response--

Catch-22 said that many of his male friends were disappointed that they couldn't find girlfriends who were intelligent enough for them. Could it not also be that they are overstating their own intelligence? And could it not be that women, socialised to be agreeable and defer to men, might even play down their intelligence? Believing that appearing too intelligent is threatening to men?
You didn't state whether you accept or reject the entire notion of intelligence. Regardless, I do accept the concept and know that my friends are part of the group that I described as "the highest levels of intelligence" in my first post. No, our lives do not revolve around this fact and we don't circle-jerk to our Stanford-Binet scores. But these are friends of mine and I have no reason to distort the reality of the situation.
As for the second part of your comments, I do agree that at times the deferential behavior you refer to can take place. In my experiences, however, the opposite has happened more frequently. Intelligent women will use false humility and claim not to be smart, yet at the same time covertly attempt to display their intelligence as prominantly as possible. So they are supposedly playing dumb when they are actually putting their very best foot forward. This "false humility" behavior has also been described in the literature.

 

[fizzygirl]

Also on average men have larger heads, I'm prety sure I read somewhere they found a linking correlation between the size of a person head, and their inherent intellect levels being superior to the median average. They used to look at this as perhaps a factor a looooong time ago, before Binet began his studies. I think it was Galton that proposed it. He didn't find anything to suggest this. It kind of went the way of phrenology.

She isn't too much of an abstract thinker, but maybe thats why I like her, you know opposites attracting and all. Actually, people are more attracted to similar, not opposite--but that's a whole other post.

 

[Infinite Jest]

You didn't state whether you accept or reject the entire notion of intelligence. Regardless, I do accept the concept and know that my friends are part of the group that I described as "the highest levels of intelligence" in my first post. No, our lives do not revolve around this fact and we don't circle-jerk to our Stanford-Binet scores. But these are friends of mine and I have no reason to distort the reality of the situation.
Fair point, I'll take your word for it - I don't know you guys, after all. I'm just throwing some ideas up for consideration.
I do accept the notion of intelligence, also. I'm just not entirely sure what it is.

 

[nads]

If you don't mind I think I'll toss in a few ideas.
If we're defining intelligence as logic/reason etc. then what we really mean (IMO) is the ability to detach our thinking from our emotions. This definition then means the more intelligent person would be one that can keep their cool in sticky situations without being caught up in emotional turmoil. The managing director who can guide a fast-falling company out of debt, the sergeant who can keep his (or her ) platoon together in the heat of battle, or the high school student who can rise above social pressures to do well.
Are men more smarter than women? Well, I'd have to say no here because based upon the above assumptions, both men and women are equally able to detach themselves from emotions and become a 'Dr Spockesque' type person (a bit of deconstruction is always helpful). Plus, both sexes are equally able to act upon their emotions when they shouldn't.
The fact that most of the differences apparent in todays statistics are due to social influences makes it very difficult to decide either way. It's the nature vs nurture debate all over again, even hormones are dubious because while they are determined genetically, they are also determined environmentally (i.e. diet, moods etc.). From an evolutionists opinion, I'd say there is no reason for one sex to be geneticallysuperior to the other in terms of logical ability - the two sexes evolved together, and like attracts like.
zorn - I used to be an ace at calculus in high school. I even developed a way of differentiation far easier and simpler to the one we were taught and managed to get the whole class using it, much to the teachers chagrin. However, since then I've walked away from it, it bored me! Now I couldn't even do long division to save my life. Maths to me is like a martial art, you need to practice and keep in practice to be good at it, I don't consider myself a less logical person because I can't do math anymore.

 

[jebabelle]

okay, these are just my ideas...
Men seem to be more functionally "smart" than women. Meaning that they can figure out how to fix something better and quicker than a woman. This probably has more to do with socialization than personal brainpower (I know many females who can do these things much better than some males I know)but I'm just speaking of things I have noticed. In my experience men also seem to concentrate on a certain task at a certain time. I notice that men are not as good at multitasking as women. This could possibly sprout from the fact that men are raised to believe that they are going to be the primary bread winner in their family and as a result have subconsciously learned to concentrate on the things that will make a career possible.
On the flip side, women are more emotional and expressive. You can blame this on hormones or playing with dolls as a child or whatever you want to. Women are usually the more maternal and nurturing of the sexes. I have also noticed that women seem to have more ability to mutltitask. A possible reason for this could be watching the mother figure while growing up - washing dishes, cleaning hte house, taking care of the kids, cooking dinner, etc.
These are just general ideals that I have noticed. Not really any scientific considerations. Some people say my views on this have been "tainted" becasue I am a sociology minor...but I am just speaking of the things that I have seen.
As for the homosexual realationship thing brought up earlier...I do not really see where any sort of intelligence relationship really comes into play. In my personal experience, I was the more intelligent parther (I hate saying that, I always feel like I'm trying to toot my own horn LOL). My ex-girlfriend (I've only had one relationship - three and a half years) was, sadly, not extremely bright. She's very artsy and creative, but has always had trouble with school and book work. I, on the other hand, was always a math freak growing up. At the time we were dating neither of us would have been described as extremely butch or extremely femme (though she has gravitated toward the femme classifcation since) so I don't personally think that we would have either fallen into a "masculine" intelligence bracket.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't think that an intellectual discrepancy is all that fundamental to a relationship. Maybe the relationship will last longer if the two involved are somewhat similar, but I know many couples (homo or hetero) who have lasted/not lasted no matter how close or far apart their IQ scores may have been. I think it's just a persoanl preference kind of thing...if you can't stand to be around "stupid" people, you need to go out and find someone of above average intelligence, but if it's not that big of a deal to you (ME!) then it's okay as long as you can deal with having to pull out a dictionary for your partner at times. LOL
Maybe I'm just one of the old-fashioned 23 year olds who think that a relationship doesn't have to be built on intellectualism.....

 

[xtcxtc]

men smarter than women ??

a little over 3 years ago i made passing reference to "the bell curve" in a post and belisarius referred to it as "racist crap" and mr. sticky agreed.

since then i have done a lot of reading on race, genes and IQ without coming across any memorable mention of gender based differences in IQ. however such differences obviously exist so it must be very politically incorrect to mention same.

apart from nobel prizes women just cannot compete in intellectual pursuits such as chess, bridge, backgammon etc. any ideas as to why this is so ??? note also that IQ tests are already calibrated to remove any gender based biases.

 

[starlightgemini]

All the statistics in the world will not convince me that one gender is smarter than the other. Especially when you are trying to tell me men are smarter than women

 

[chrissie]

well.... fox recently had a nationwide iq test and men did come out 2 points higher than women on average.

i think we all have the upperhand in different areas. that's what makes each sex unique.

 

[KaNdEbUtTaHfLy]

All the statistics in the world will not convince me that one gender is smarter than the other. Especially when you are trying to tell me men are smarter than women

^beautiful and smart

i dont buy it-- not for a second. you said women simply CANT... maybe tehy just choose not to.. why the fuck would i want to play chess? each person has their own unique talents and special areas of interest- you cannot judge that by sex, race, religion, etc.

 

[shannabanana]

There are still differences in the activities boys are encouraged to pursue vs the activities that girls are encouraged to pursue. I am not going to look anything up right now, but I have read of studies done in elementary and junior high classes where teachers are still found to give boys more attention in disciplines such as mathematics.

 

[xtcxtc]

starlightgemini

do you accept that men are athletically superior to women. if yes why would you even imagine it is not possible they are also smarter ??

btw the same holds true for race as well as gender !!

 

[majikc0w]

That's right the women are... smarter.

/me dances to The Grateful Dead

 

[starlightgemini]

There are still differences in the activities boys are encouraged to pursue vs the activities that girls are encouraged to pursue.

I agree.

But it is hard to say whether women or men *naturally* are inclined to be more skillful in certain areas, or whether it has to do with how they were raised from birth. Something tells me its the latter. I doubt that having certain hormones (estrogen vs. testosterone) can really dictate what your skills will be later in life.

And I think society has a lot to do with gender roles. I mean...sure, you don't see A LOT of women as auto technicians but that doesn't mean women can't be just as good at it as men are! A lot of professions, hobbies, and interests sometimes seem to be of more interest to one gender than another. But again, I don't think its BECAUSE they are male or female...its what we are taught to believe is associated with each gender.

Errr...I hope I'm making sense.

 

[wanderlust]

see majikcow knows...

Let us put men and women together, see which one is smarter,
Some say men, but I say no, women got the men like a puppet show.

It ain't me it's the people that say, men are leading women astray,
I say, it's the women today, smarter than the men in every way,
That's right the women are smarter, the women are smarted that's right.