Are Men More Intelligent Than Women?

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 12:46 pm

Wooo, hooo....this'll irritate a few people. HOWEVER...consider the source, ok? Look at his other work before you decide if he's full of the old crappola.

"It is research that is guaranteed to delight men - and infuriate the women in their lives. A controversial new study has claimed that men really are more intelligent than women.

The study - carried out by a man - concluded that men's IQs are almost four points higher than women's.

British-born researcher John Philippe Rushton, who previously created a furore by suggesting intelligence is influenced by race, says the finding could explain why so few women make it to the top in the workplace.

He claims the 'glass ceiling' phenomenon is probably due to inferior intelligence, rather than discrimination or lack of opportunity.

The University of Western Ontario psychologist reached his conclusion after scrutinising the results of university aptitude tests taken by 100,000 students aged 17 and 18 of both sexes.

A focus on a factors such as the ability to quickly grasp a complex concept, verbal reasoning skills and creativity - some of they key ingredients of intelligence - revealed the male teenagers had IQs that were an average of 3.63 points higher. The average person has an IQ of around 100.

The findings, which held true for all classes and levels of parental education, overturn a 100 year consensus that men and women average the same in general mental ability. They also conflict with evidence that girls do better in school exams than boys.

But Prof Rushton, who was born in Bournemouth and obtained his doctorate in social psychology from the London School of Economics, argues that the faster maturing of girls leads to them outshining boys in the classroom.

And since almost all previous data showing an absence of difference between the sexes was gathered on schoolchildren, the gender difference could easily have been missed.

'It looks like up until late adolescence, the females have the advantage over males because they mature faster, which masks the underlying difference, he said.

Although experts have accepted that men and women differ mentally, with males averaging higher on tests of 'spatial ability' and females higher on verbal tests, it was assumed the differences averaged out, leaving no difference in overall intelligence.

Prof Rushton believes the differences are directly linked to brain size, with other studies showing men having slightly bigger brains than women.

'We know that men have larger brains, even when you take into account larger body size,' said the researcher. 'That means there are more neurons. The question is what these neurons are doing in a man - and they probably have an advantage in processing information.'

It is thought the difference may date back to the Stone Age, with women seeking out men who are more intelligent than them in a bid to pass on the best genes to their children.

'Some people have suggested it evolved because women prefer men who are more intelligent than they are for husbands,' said the professor.

'Just as they prefer men who are taller than them, they also prefer a male who is a little ahead of them in IQ.'

Critics claim Prof Rushton's results could have been skewed by the inclusion of more test results from females than form males.

Prof Rushton, who four years ago triggered a scientific row by claiming intelligence and behaviour are influenced by race, with blacks being more likely to be involved in crime and Asians having a greater chance of high IQs, however, stands by his results.

'These are unpopular conclusions,' he said. 'People should not be made to feel afraid to study controversial issues.

'We have the right to find the truth. One should really look at the facts.'

His work appears to confirm British research which showed men have bigger brains and higher IQs than women, which may explain why chess grandmasters and geniuses are more likely to be male.

The analyses of more than 20,000 verbal reasoning tests taken by university students from around the world revealed that women's IQs are up to five points lower than men's .

Women needn't feel despondent, however, as the scientists believe women can achieve just as much as men - as long as they work harder.

:wah:

zinkyusa · Post by **zinkyusa** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 12:51 pm

Sounds like a crock, I don't have much faith in IQ tests anyway...

(Walks away on his knuckles)

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:07 pm

You're right, Hamster!

sunny104 · Post by **sunny104** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:11 pm

zinkyusa wrote: Sounds like a crock, I don't have much faith in IQ tests anyway...

(Walks away on his knuckles)
:yh_giggle

weber · Post by **weber** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:13 pm

I interviewed 1,000 men and 1,000 women and it was 100% conclusive. My findings were that all thousand men could not give birth and all thousand women could give birth. Best survey I ever saw. Who cares how intelligent they are. They have only one ahem certain something that we want, SOMETIMES:wah:

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:14 pm

See, I figure MEN created that "IQ" test.....:wah:

911 · Post by **911** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:14 pm

Frankly, I think that it's because men are better at multi-tasking than women.

I mean, they can put their hands down their pants, drink beer, use the remote control and belch all at the same time and never miss a minute of the football game! :wah: :wah: :wah:

zinkyusa · Post by **zinkyusa** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:20 pm

If men are so smart why do we end up on the couch?

cars · Post by **cars** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:29 pm

If Men were smarter, they would not ever get married!!! :p :p :p

(And if you tell my wife I said that I'll deny it!)

zinkyusa · Post by **zinkyusa** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:32 pm

cars wrote: If Men were smarter, they would not ever get married!!!

uh oh cars, messa think yousa step in the doodie pie now...:yh_beatup

911 · Post by **911** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:36 pm

zinkyusa wrote: If men are so smart why do we end up on the couch?

Because learning is a never ending process

cars · Post by **cars** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:38 pm

zinkyusa wrote: uh oh cars, messa think yousa step in the doodie pie now...:yh_beatup

It won't be the first time, and surely not the last either! :p

:rolleyes:

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:01 pm

Don't know about the states but here back in the days when we had a test at 11 to decide what kind of secondary school you went to the bar for girls was set higher. It was always assumed that they simply developed faster and things evened out. Nowadays girls are performing better than the boys-before they would be steered away from academia since they were all going to get married and have kids so why waste an education on them. It's actually an issue causing some concern. Male and female do think differently and approach problems in a different manner-different not necessarily one more intelligent than the other.

If women are so good at multi-tasking how come my wife can't keep up with the plotlines when i channel hop?

Course I will now leave it for a woman to have the last word.

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:37 pm

Several years ago I heard someone suggest that men like to "channel surf" because it's a hold-over from cave/hunting times, when men were constantly on the lookout for game. :rolleyes:

Personally, I think they're on the lookout for HOOTERS ads!

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:10 pm

Lulu2 wrote: Several years ago I heard someone suggest that men like to "channel surf" because it's a hold-over from cave/hunting times, when men were constantly on the lookout for game. :rolleyes:

Personally, I think they're on the lookout for HOOTERS ads!

What's a hooters ad?

KARENSVINEYARD · Post by **KARENSVINEYARD** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:30 pm

[QUOTE=Lulu2]Wooo, hooo....this'll irritate a few people. HOWEVER...consider the source, ok? Look at his other work before you decide if he's full of the old crappola.

i've participated in some studies like that before when i took psychology in college right after high school. Studies and some new theories were sayin' that men are better with abstract thought and the usage of the part of the brain that alerts ya to a reaction especially survival. women though are smarter and better at tapping into parts of the brain not commonly used for every day short term memory and common reactions more less that associate with a reflex or instinctual action. alright, i know that sounded alittle corny ya'all but you get the picture....a better picture if you're a woman. Just kiddin'

G-man · Post by **G-man** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:47 pm

Only those men that are intelligent enough not to get involved in this discussion... :wah:

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 12:04 am

gmc wrote: What's a hooters ad?

Hi GMC. Hooters is a popular restaurant chain in the US. The waitresses wear silly little uniforms of little orange shorts, pantyhose and skintight, low-cut white t shirts that have HOOTERS written across them. The restaurant logo is an owl and its eyes are used for the O's in hOOters. Hooters is also a slang name here for womens' breasts, so there's a double meaning there. Some people think the whole thing is sexist but it's actually supposed to be considered a family restaurant and "good clean fun" in America.

About the topic, I think this study is bunk. Neither is more intelligent as an overall rule. I think men tend to be good at math while women are good at language and literature but I think that's due more to nurture than nature.

Besides, look at all women have to do in their everyday lives. We have to cook, clean, babysit, medicate, shop for bargains, run a house, raise kids, tend to men, be doctors, lawyers, scientists, moms, wives, ETC and women were multitasking before that was even a word.

The glass ceiling is still due to favoritism in the workplace and nothing else.

Now if the study said men were physically stronger than women I would have to agree in an overall sense. But as for being smarter than women, no way. :-6

KARENSVINEYARD · Post by **KARENSVINEYARD** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 12:37 am

zinkyusa wrote: If men are so smart why do we end up on the couch?

Cause ya'all are smart enough to stay outa our way:wah:

KARENSVINEYARD · Post by **KARENSVINEYARD** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 12:40 am

RedGlitter wrote: Hi GMC. Hooters is a popular restaurant chain in the US. The waitresses wear silly little uniforms of little orange shorts, pantyhose and skintight, low-cut white t shirts that have HOOTERS written across them. The restaurant logo is an owl and its eyes are used for the O's in hOOters. Hooters is also a slang name here for womens' breasts, so there's a double meaning there. Some people think the whole thing is sexist but it's actually supposed to be considered a family restaurant and "good clean fun" in America.

About the topic, I think this study is bunk. Neither is more intelligent as an overall rule. I think men tend to be good at math while women are good at language and literature but I think that's due more to nurture than nature.

Besides, look at all women have to do in their everyday lives. We have to cook, clean, babysit, medicate, shop for bargains, run a house, raise kids, tend to men, be doctors, lawyers, scientists, moms, wives, ETC and women were multitasking before that was even a word.

The glass ceiling is still due to favoritism in the workplace and nothing else.

Now if the study said men were physically stronger than women I would have to agree in an overall sense. But as for being smarter than women, no way. :-6

yeppers gottsta agree on that one. probably just stir up mudslingin' more than anything if its here long enough to go that direction.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 5:09 am

gmc wrote: Don't know about the states but here back in the days when we had a test at 11 to decide what kind of secondary school you went to the bar for girls was set higher. It was always assumed that they simply developed faster and things evened out. Nowadays girls are performing better than the boys-before they would be steered away from academia since they were all going to get married and have kids so why waste an education on them. It's actually an issue causing some concern.

It's because there has been an effort to concentrate on girls' eduucation. This

is wrong. Whatever happened to "equal opportunities"?

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:06 am

Bill Sikes wrote: It's because there has been an effort to concentrate on girls' eduucation. This

is wrong. Whatever happened to "equal opportunities"?

I agree that edcuation should be equal to both genders. However for generations, girls received substandard education because it was assumed they didn't need to be concentrated on since their main purpose in life was to marry and create babies. That's where things went wrong.

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 7:31 am

Now G-Man is a smart man..!! :wah:

[QUOTE]Only those men that are intelligent enough not to get involved in this discussion...[/QUOTE]

911 · Post by **911** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 12:16 pm

Back in the 50's they did a test with younger children and told them that a study had been done and it was a fact that people with blue eyes were smarter than anyone else. From then on those children with blue eyes did better on tests than the rest of the class. They became most self assured and excelled in everything the teacher asked. Meanwhile, the rest of the children became depressed and did poorly on tests. They became quieter and didn't play as well. This experiment only lasted for a few weeks and then the teacher told them that it was not true.

Just suppose articles like this were done just to make women feel less than human and it's made up in hopes that women would get out of the workplace and make room for more men? Think about it. . . . :yh_questn

KARENSVINEYARD · Post by **KARENSVINEYARD** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 7:57 pm

Bill Sikes wrote: It's because there has been an effort to concentrate on girls' eduucation. This

is wrong. Whatever happened to "equal opportunities"?

equal opportunity Mr. Sikes? Last i heard it's only the squeaky wheel that gets the grease, why's that Mr. Sikes? cause unless it isn't workin' the way it's supposed to it wont get much notice. If it's workin' the way it should it wouldn't be makin' much noise now would it? now this's simply conversation and its meant only in debate so maybe i shouldnt'a said it like that, cause it's not personal and i shouldnt pin it to ya like that. its just the subject matter catching a nerve i suppose.