November 30, 2006

Misogynists of the world rejoice! Men more intelligent than women!

Writing about web page http://education.independent.co.uk/higher/article2024763.ece

Or women less intelligent than men.

According to a recent analysis of data at Manchester University conducted by Dr Paul Irwing:

All the research I’ve done points to a gender difference in general cognitive ability. There is a mean difference of about five IQ points. The further you go up the distribution the more and more skewed it becomes. There are twice as many men with an IQ of 120-plus as there are women, there are 30 times the number of men with an IQ of 170-plus as there are women.

The results of both studies were a shock to me. I find prejudice abhorrent. I’ve always taught sex differences from a left-wing point of view, that women are every bit as good as men. My findings don’t fit my view of the world at all. Girls often do better than boys at school. There has to be some female compensating factor, most importantly the ability to process speech sounds, which means women read faster and more accurately and have an advantage in basic writing tasks. And women work harder than men and are more conscientious so they do things technic-ally correctly. Men are often quite original but deficient in what is technically demanded.

People should have equal opportunities but if you want a society where everyone feels satisfied you’re not going to find men and women doing the same things in the same proportions. It would help if we recognised that.

Jokey titles aside, some of the observations made by Dr. Irwing on the results of his research seem to appeal very much to common sense. Males and females have intellectual differences. He points towards compensating factors in females which could account to why women do better in parts of the education system but the gist of it is that in terms of IQ, there are more intelligent men than intelligent women.

It’ll be interesting to see any follow-up research or debunkings of this.


- 86 comments by 2 or more people Not publicly viewable

[Skip to the latest comment]
  1. Was gonna say, haven’t IQ tests been seen as biased towards western male intelligence for a while? Wouldn’t be a surprise considering who invented them :P

    30 Nov 2006, 18:39

  2. I always considered the two genders to be of roughly similar average intelligence, but with men having a larger variance.

    30 Nov 2006, 23:15

  3. Holly is right. IQ tests are biased towards white, middle class males. (as is society! oh! controversial! not.)

    01 Dec 2006, 22:38

  4. Yes indeed Eleanor, biology has a male bias. Whoops.

    Interesting point concerning the IQ tests Holly. But would would make them more “fair” towards females? Sewing and cooking sections? Oh dear Hamid. I mean more verbal reasoning instead of mathematical portions etc? Mmmm not quite sure.

    02 Dec 2006, 05:32

  5. If there’s a cooking section added then reduce my IQ straight away! Charcoal is a real dish, honest. But seriously, it’s hard to say, the whole thing is white male orientated as it awards points for thing which white males excel at, so how to change it might not be the question we should ask. This isn’t a feminist rant, it is hard to see how other groups can be incorporated, but the best answer is to not put too much emphasis on the things.

    The GCSE/A level thing seems to support this. As it includes more coursework girls do better, probably because (in personal experience and very generally speaking) boys cope better in pressure situations which involve lots of recall (exams) whereas girls are suited to sustained work requiring motivation and effort over a longer period (coursework).

    Really clever people can do both so don’t start telling me you can do both, chances are people reading this are Warwick students, so not stupid.

    02 Dec 2006, 10:35

  6. Really clever people can do both so don’t start telling me you can do both

    coughs I must admit I do love exams and I do dislike coursework. But I have been known to hand the odd piece in :P

    02 Dec 2006, 18:59

  7. IQ tests are really arbitrary though. People talk about IQ as though it is some precisely defined physical quantity that is “out there” in the same way that the cardinality of a set is. It’s just a measurement of how a person performs on a really quite limited test. We need to take the concept of IQ far, far less seriously.

    02 Dec 2006, 21:39

  8. I thought the same as Luke (comment 2) – the genders are equally intelligent but men have a larger variance ie there are also many more unintelligent men than women.

    03 Dec 2006, 00:36

  9. James, it’s been my experience that people who have had IQ tests which result in a high IQ tend to be rather clever, at least within Mathematics or within more literary topics. And people who have tested with lower IQs tend to not be quite as able .

    03 Dec 2006, 04:47

  10. Christopher Rossdale

    I’ve always taught sex differences from a left-wing point of view, that women are every bit as good as men.

    What’s that got to do with the left? I meet more left-wingers who accept differences between sexes and don’t want for that to disadvantage people, than who insist that we’re all the same. It’s been known for years that men tend to do some things better, and women can do other things better – Holly’s got it right here, IQ tests were constructed by men to deal with male intelligence rankings – no-one’s denying that there are difference in capabilities, it’s logical to assume that this translates into IQ scores.

    03 Dec 2006, 10:59

  11. Chris, “Left” is just a handy umbrella term for Brits, akin to the use of “Liberal” in the US, encompassing everything that’s not quite right-wing. And some of the branches of this very loose “Leftism” include various forms of Feminism, some of which preach the absolute equality of the sexes. The idea that women and men can be equal spiritually and politically but might excel in different intellectual fields as a result of simple biology isn’t an appealing prospect to some (of course, lots of generalisations here).

    03 Dec 2006, 11:08

  12. The IQ tests were performed on university students. From the moment of birth, males and females are treated differently, so it’s conceivable that this difference in treatment will have had a big effect on IQ scores by the time the subjects are 20.

    A different point:
    Surely the more essentialist variants of feminism would be drawn to biological explanations in preference to social ones.

    03 Dec 2006, 11:27

  13. Hero

    That’s right, women don’t really excel at advanced intelligent thinking so a more ‘fair’ test would have special ‘non-hard’ questions for women to do well at.

    Or perhaps we could have special ‘coursework’ versions of the IQ test where you ask all the questions and people who don’t get them right are told what they did wrong, given three weeks to research the real answer, and then get to work on it with the teacher and resubmit – they can then do this as many times as they like before their ‘best’ result is counted. This ensures that people who didn’t get it the first time (mostly women) have their marks ‘equalised’ making the test fairer…

    Or perhaps we could just give everyone A*??

    I’m sick of this idea that we should hide the lesser intelligence of women because it makes women feel bad.

    How would you like to go to a surgeon that was ‘pretty much OK, well they are a really nice person, so lets let them off the fact they can’t do surgery anyway that would be sexist’ or a Good Surgeon.

    Bloody hell, what’s next ‘nice smile’ points??

    04 Dec 2006, 09:16

  14. Re comment 2:

    I always considered the two genders to be of roughly similar average intelligence, but with men having a larger variance.

    This is the received wisdom. But the Independent journo is too poor at statistics to understand the implications of this.

    Let’s go along with received wisdom and suppose both males and females have the same mean I.Q., but the I.Q.’s of the males have a larger variance. Then if a sample is taken which is biased towards higher I.Q., the mean of that sample will be higher for males than females. But the mean of a sample biased towards lower I.Q., will have a higher mean I.Q. for the females than for the males.

    University students have, I understand, a higher I.Q. than the population as a whole. they should also be able to read sources critically.

    04 Dec 2006, 11:56

  15. Hero

    Yes, this still means that the more intelligent humans are three times more likely to be male. (women who are cleverer than 130 are rare)

    04 Dec 2006, 12:46

  16. Petey

    Add together the fact that women are more likely to be promoted regardless of IQ, and you have big probs!

    04 Dec 2006, 12:47

  17. Nick

    As everyone develops in some kind of culture, I don’t think you can ever be sure about the distributions of and differences between male/female intelligence. I do think you can be sure that people who make statements like:

    Add together the fact that women are more likely to be promoted regardless of IQ, and you have big probs!

    have decidedly below average intelligence (or aren’t making use of what they have). You can tell they don’t read the news (or can’t understand statistics) either.

    04 Dec 2006, 13:35

  18. Women more likely to be promoted? Where did you get that idea from??

    Women are actually less likely to be hired or promoted (especially in small businesses), and there is often a pay gap between men and women in the same job. You know why? Not because one sex scores better on IQ tests, but because men can’t get pregnant, and therefore aren’t going to want maternity leave.

    That’s a completely different rant that I don’t have time for.

    04 Dec 2006, 13:48

  19. Petey

    YOU have obviously not been reading the stats on higher education and the public sector in general have you! But what you are saying is a) women are less of a good investment for businesses because of pregnancy, but you are implying that this is wrong.. If you think people should be compensated for inherent weaknesses then perhaps underperforming men should be paid more…

    Actually there is much hidden in the stats that your suggest for women v men. For example equality of expectation and education has only really been true since the mid 80s (arguably later, but if we keep it there for argument’s sake). If you assume that the levels you are talking about are largely after 15 -20 years’ experience, people finishing their education mid 90s should start to feel the equality kicking in, which would mean that we are still five years off equality at these levels. We should really only include the under 30s when we look for equality, and equality is actually superceded by greater opportunities for women at the under 30 level with many graduate recruiters recruiting more women than men to ALLOW for pregnancy wastage.

    This means that men are disadvantaged by being reliable, and the problem is getting worse.

    04 Dec 2006, 16:16

  20. I often wonder at criticism of coursework based assessment considering that there are remarkably few situations in real life where one must sit down, devoid of any reference and cooperation, and resolve an issue. So what if it means someone might get the answer right second time around after consultation. Surely it is better to apply this attitude in real life than arrogantly doing it all yourself and potentially getting it very wrong with it only being noticed afterwards when it is too late. To use an example above I would prefer a surgeon to consult with others and make a good consensus decision than just slice me open and potentially remove something incorrectly.

    Also Hero, we are discussing IQ, and as the previous comments have already established IQ does not mean intelligence, it means competence in a restricted set of tasks. Maybe a female reading these comments would have read that bit and worked out how to use George’s graph from that.

    04 Dec 2006, 16:18

  21. Hero

    Wooah Holly! hope you are not a civil engineering student! wouldn’t like to get into your building! perhaps the public sector is more your bag! um if every surgeon had to lobby (by committee?) for a consensus decision whilst you are on the slab and bleeding to death.. or perhaps you prefer the idea that he could get it kind of right and just leave you brain damaged, but that would be OK because he tries hard.. sheesh I didn’t realise this idea had gone so deep!

    Actually, IQ is pretty good since it does mean compentence in a range of tasks designed to assess ability across a range of ‘intelligences’

    Slagging me off, or others off is a useful social skill, and might get you political points in an organisation, but there is no test for it in IQ tests, and neither should there be.

    04 Dec 2006, 16:28

  22. It scares me the ignorance of the surely mis-named ‘hero’

    04 Dec 2006, 16:49

  23. you ask all the questions and people who don’t get them right are told what they did wrong, given three weeks to research the real answer, and then get to work on it with the teacher and resubmit – they can then do this as many times as they like before their ‘best’ result is counted.

    If you believe this is how the coursework system works, then I wonder how you can account for the fact that those with a Y chromosome do so much worse within this seemingly failsafe system for getting full marks.

    04 Dec 2006, 16:57

  24. Problem One: We seem to be confusing knowledge and intelligence here. Coursework and Exams both test knowledge. IQ tests supposedly measure intelligence.

    Problem Two: Some IQ tests are biased in favour of men. (I would challenge the white/ middle class bias, but there is definitely a gender bias at work.) Some tests, however, aren’t. As none of us here know whether or not the tests used in the study were ones with that bias or not, then we cannot conclude for definite one way or another.

    Aditional point: “Hero”, you mentioned, looking at the graph in post 14 that “more intelligent humans are three times more likely to be male” Well, guess what, the least intelligent humans are also three times more likely to be male. Taking a mean average, that means that on average there is no noticeable difference between the sexes. As you aren’t logged in (a cowardly move, IMHO) I can’t tell if you study any statistics at all as part of your course, but my guessing is…not.

    04 Dec 2006, 17:01

  25. Hero

    Um Yes.. overall there are some stupidblokes out there.. but that doesn’t take away the intelligence of the greater number of intelligent men than intelligent women.

    Actually this phenomenon is more to do with another hypothesis that I am researching so won’t discuss.

    The ‘coward’ technique of trying to get me to do what you think I should do is a bit lame isn’t it?

    Actually the coursework argument is more like ‘girls like the fun of regularly studying whether they learn something new or not (I call it the ‘organising coloured pencils’ approach) and boys once they have addressed a subject and proved their ability in it tire easily when low-level knowledge is repeated endlessly for the benefit of the thick.

    04 Dec 2006, 18:06

  26. Nich

    Actually the coursework argument is more like ‘girls like the fun of regularly studying whether they learn something new or not (I call it the ‘organising coloured pencils’ approach) and boys once they have addressed a subject and proved their ability in it tire easily when low-level knowledge is repeated endlessly for the benefit of the thick.

    It quite possible that girls get bored too, but are more willing to do the work anyway (whether for genetic or social reasons). It’s also possible that the reason boys still do better in exams is that a substantial number of people still assume girls education and intelligence doesn’t really matter and that effects their confidence in exams and in other stressful assessments of intelligence or knowledge (like IQ tests). Of course, someone’s bound to deny that people are still biased against girls. However, at least 50% of the time I hear someone complement a girl (by which I mean a child not a young woman) they say something along the lines of “aren’t you pretty”; with a boy it’s far more likely to be “aren’t you clever”, or something else about a skill. I’d be amazed if that difference doesn’t have some effect.

    04 Dec 2006, 18:20

  27. Hero

    1. Since we are talking about possibilities, it is also possible that men are more intelligent than women, and that women underperform in exams because they test not only knowledge, but efficient application of that knowledge.
    2. Have you ever tried never telling a girl they are pretty? Have you ever truly experienced girl-rage!
    3. You can be pretty AND clever you know.. and your statement also implies that men are never complemented on looks, perhaps this is the source of intelligence.. or the source of anger.. or the source of the motivation to achieve more?
    4. Seeing as almost everyone is rushing in to help girls achieve more, and women get rewarded for ability in ways men can only dream of, the idea that women are somehow still thinking they don’t matter is rubbish.. what you are saying is women who fail in exams, the poor dears, must be feeling aw a little unconfident, but when men fail in exams its ok.
    5. What exams do test is the ability to perform under pressure/on demand. Women fail at it.

    04 Dec 2006, 18:28

  28. Coursework and Exams both test knowledge. IQ tests supposedly measure intelligence.

    Coursework and exams do test knowledge but they also test application of knowledge, as Hero pointed out, and, especially in subjects such as Maths, they test intelligence too – the ability to ‘spot’ something or ‘see’ the answer. I’m not convinced girls are intrinsically worse at this element of exams than boys but in my experience they do seem to get less enjoyment out of it. There doesn’t seem to be so much of that competitive attitude of “I’ve got to prove I’m clever enough to spot this” among girls, which, as Nich points out, could be a result of a culture where girls’ achievements aren’t thought of as being as important as boys’.

    04 Dec 2006, 18:58

  29. Nich

    “Hero” asked me some questions; so, despite fearing it’s pointless, I’ll reply.

    Since we are talking about possibilities, it is also possible that men are more intelligent than women, and that women underperform in exams because they test not only knowledge, but efficient application of that knowledge.

    Yes, it’s possible (although, for different reasons, I doubt most exams actually do that). However, everyday experience (and most things I’ve read) tells me that any distinction which does exist is fairly small; no one has yet come up with a scientific test that is sufficiently widely agreed to avoid bias to settle any argument (and I doubt they every will). In the absence of such a test, wouldn’t it make more sense not to assume that over half the human race was more likely to be stupid?

    As an aside, it’s also possible that women are more intelligent than men. I don’t support that hypothesis any more than I support its converse, but it’s no less reasonable.

    Have you ever tried never telling a girl they are pretty?

    No, assuming that by girls you mean the children I referred to, I don’t think I have. If I have, it was when I was a child too and I really can’t remember.

    You can be pretty AND clever you know.. and your statement also implies that men are never complemented on looks, perhaps this is the source of intelligence.. or the source of anger.. or the source of the motivation to achieve more?

    I do know that people can be pretty and clever – and I wasn’t implying anything about men (I never even mentioned men and women, just girls and boys), I was simply saying that girls were more likely to be complemented on their looks than boys were.

    what you are saying is women who fail in exams, the poor dears, must be feeling aw a little unconfident, but when men fail in exams its ok.

    No it isn’t; apart from anything else, I’m not quite that patronising. I did say that the chance of someone being more confident in their skills is higher if they are respected for their skills rather than their looks. I didn’t say that couldn’t apply to men or boys, I said it was more likely to be relevant for girls than boys.

    What exams do test is the ability to perform under pressure/on demand. Women fail at it.

    Really. All of them? In that case, I must have missed something when I’ve dealt with women who are professors or leaders of businesses and charities, because it seemed to me that they dealt with pressure at least as well as the men in the same situation.

    The more exams I’ve done, the more it’s seemed to me that what most exams do is test how well you can predict what the examiner was thinking when he or she wrote the question. I don’t think the ability to do that under pressure is generally that useful; I’ll admit there are circumstances where it could be, but they aren’t that common. (Not that think most school coursework is any better – as I remember, that just assesses your ability to follow fairly arbitrary and pointless rules.)

    04 Dec 2006, 20:53

  30. I have found, many times, that having a high IQ in no way correlates in a positive manner to having good common sense.

    04 Dec 2006, 23:20

  31. Wooah Holly! hope you are not a civil engineering student! wouldn’t like to get into your building!

    Yes, because all the buildings on earth were designed by a single man, sat alone in a room with only his memory of things he read in the past. I’m not an engineer but I have a hell of a lot of insight into how engineering works (and indeed the whole building process) from knowing engineers, architects and builders.

    Ditto your point about surgeons, no surgeon operates alone, they have teams with them covering a cariety of areas, and people outside of the operating theatre who can look things up and come back to them. Hell, if it hadn’t been the for the nice doctors who attended my birth consulting with another hospital and not just going on their initial, incorrect, diagnosis I might well be dead now, or at least the victim of unnecessary surgery. Funny how an argument can fall down when you take on an informed person.

    perhaps the public sector is more your bag!

    Yes, maybe it is. Maybe the world would be better ruled by women with men doing the tricky, hands on stuff on their own (literally). Illogical? Well your words implied it, not mine.

    04 Dec 2006, 23:22

  32. “Hero” – you are a flaming troll. And I mean that in both the sense of someone getting pleasure from winding someone up online anonymously, and a neanderthal.

    Yes, some men are cleverer than some women, but the converse is also true. In fact most women are cleverer than some men, whereas only some men are cleverer than most women. Check the graph, do some stats, work it out for yourself, or get a girl to help you.

    Where the hell is everyone getting the idea that women “fail” at exams?? I’ve just been writing out a CV, and every single one of my grades at GCSE and AS/A2 was an A or an A*. None of these were assessed by more than 1/3 coursework. I can give you countless examples of other women in similar, if not better positions.

    The whole idea of whether women are “expected” to perform well or not is largely irrelevant. They do perform just as well as their male counterparts at all levels of academia. True; a lot of people in this male biased society are still apt to place a woman’s looks at higher value than her intelligence, but again, that’s a completely seperate rant.

    04 Dec 2006, 23:31

  33. In fact most women are cleverer than some men, whereas only some men are cleverer than most women.

    I’m not sure that’s the comparison you intended to make. It can equally be said that most men are cleverer than some women and only some women are cleverer than most men, can’t it? Can you clarify?

    05 Dec 2006, 00:46

  34. Hero

    Phew!

    Alexandra is getting foot-stamping at her inability to manipulate me, and has now resorted to geeky name-calling! Perhaps I forgot to say how beautiful you are, sorry. ;)

    Lets work backwards…
    James,I agree so many holes in Alexandra’s interpretation of the graph and stats- I wonder if she studies sociology!

    Alexandra, if you define your use of the word ‘some’ you might have more respect from me, some (ie the very bottom two) women are stupider than over 99% of all men!!!!) but if you use the graph (which ignores the top-skewing referred to) then half of all men are more intelligent that half of all women but the converse is also true. there is much more to imply in there, like the fact that in those above the 66th percentile, men outperform women.. which would fit with the world of employment in that equality is more normal the further you move away from senior positions, but my interpretation is that this is more to do with age and equality of expectation than intelligence (largely because most jobs don’t require high IQs).

    I would be intrigued to see how, with your A* you would compare with the o-level system that more rigorously tested people, especially in the sciences, or indeed where you would would come were there an equal distribution of marks rather than a bunching around the A* mark.

    When I say ‘women fail’ I was being deliberately inflammatory in response to the assumptions people are making that by saying ‘men have higher intelligences at the top of the scale’ many on here seem to equate that with the idea that all women are below men (eg ‘half of all society are stupid’)

    Some women atthe ‘top’ perform as male counterparts, but (especially in the most challenging subjects) men performing at the level of the most competent woman are numerous- this means that to employ a man at these levels would be a strategy more statistically likely to succeed.

    I’m not sure the last point is strictly correct, at least in implication – the people I know who are most scathing about looks and who are most concerned about looks and who spend the most money on trying to improve their looks and who judge others most on looks are .. you’ve guessed it.. women.

    Holly Do you think the other surgeons consulted with were successful in their exams or were granted results through assisted coursework? ‘Knowing engineers’ really isn’t the same as sitting down and working out the stress profile of a structure accurately. I know plenty of professional and successful people in many areas but would not have the naivity to say that I understood their job becuase I understood the person!

    If the world were really better ruled by the outstandingly brilliant and effiecient women, how come they weren’t so brilliant and efficient as to set up a society that didn’t disadvantage them (rather than ask permission to be given a leg up in a male society)?

    Gavin… common sense.. means sense that is gained without investigation.. and its name implies what it is, general beliefs and expectations that maybe held by a majority, but not by those with more insight… eg.. hot water makes steam is an example of a ‘common sense’ understanding…water turns into a gas (NOT steam) on suitable heating is a more ‘real’ answer. Common sense says that it is ‘wrong’.

    Nich, are you really sure that confidence is gained by telling someone they are skillful, or that they are acceptable and attractive as a person? If you said to a girlfriend ‘oh wow, you are really good at accountancy’ are you sure that it would make her feel as confident as complementing her on who she is? One could argue that men suffer by being seen as ‘what they do’ above ‘who they are’.

    05 Dec 2006, 10:12

  35. Hero

    James (again)
    Actually studies have shown that women have a greater need to agree with each other (often at the expense of individual performance) than they do to seek either the ‘right’ answer or the ‘best’ answer. This phenomenon is magnified in single sex (female) groups. In male only groups there is a move away from the consensus to seek the most imaginative and most non-conformist (ie the answer that breaks the mould and establishes new beliefs) answer.

    05 Dec 2006, 10:13

  36. so many holes in Alexandra’s interpretation of the graph and stats- I wonder if she studies sociology!

    I study sociology and I put the graph up. I like pictures!

    I once dated a woman who was in Mensa – the organisation for people with high I.Q. scores (and little else?). At one point she asked me how old I thought she was (we were somewhere between 35 and 45 at the time). I must confess that I didn’t have the brains to get myself out of that one!

    05 Dec 2006, 11:00

  37. who was in Mensa – the organisation for people with high I.Q. scores (and little else?)

    You’d be surprised. You’ve clearly never been offered a special mensa-rate mortgage with your Mensa magazine ;).

    05 Dec 2006, 11:09

  38. Hero

    Funny how after all those years being fully aware of her intelligence what she desparately wanted to know was ‘how do I look’ Told you!

    05 Dec 2006, 11:13

  39. Hero: What’s your point exactly? Mine was agreeing with earlier posts that IQ is not necessarily a good base of ‘intelligence’ as one would assume that the ability to survive is better than being able to spot the next number in a sequence.
    I’m fairly sure there are people out there with a high IQ that would have trouble opening a door correctly.

    05 Dec 2006, 12:13

  40. “hero” – Since you are not logged in and I can’t therefore find out who the hell you are to post insulting remarks on your blog, I would ask you to refrain from doing so on mine. That is called cowardice and spite.

    05 Dec 2006, 12:20

  41. If you think intelligent people are exempt from vanity, insecurity and self focused curiosity (applicable to both genders) then you are lacking more than a few sandwiches. I am sure you are merely making a joke but in light of previous comments it does rather come across as pettiness.

    So maybe I’m not an engineer. Maybe I understand my engineering friends. Maybe, just maybe, I listen to their accounts of how they worked things out, how they came to construct their projects, how they consulted the architects and builders and the architectural technicians and the engineers from different disciplines. Maybe I give a shit and want to learn other things beyond my academic scope. Maybe the doctor I saw earlier asked me if I was a medical student because I correctly names the obscure bone which is causing me pain. Maybe after all that I am able to have a good idea of how things work and can make an informed statement.

    And I am sure all the doctors involved passed their exams. I’m sure they also passed their coursework as to think that doctors don’t have a degree of coursework style assessment (i.e. placements) is to demonstrate a huge naivety.

    And please don’t get anyone on here started about the whole women being disadvantaged debate as your comment on it implies a vast lack of understanding of most of the relevant issues (as does your repeated attacks on sociology which is arguably the best subject when it comes to tackling the matter). Still, I had a feeling you might not spot the jokey element of that comment…

    05 Dec 2006, 12:21

  42. Rob

    I think George’s graph is excellent. My girlfiriend has boobies like the blue line, but I would like to make it clear that I wouldn’t turn down a lady with those of a red likeness.

    05 Dec 2006, 13:25

  43. Hero

    Oh Alex, (you are so sexy when you are angry).. can you see my crudely illustrated point about why I don’t have a login!

    (for the fact fans here I haven’t actually posted anything insulting on anyone’s blog, but you won’t know now because she has deleted it!)

    It was an answer poem to her ‘womans if’ with (lets be clear) no insulting statements whatsoever.

    Oh Holly, just like in so many other things, what was recieved by you was not what was transmitted by me.

    I don’t agree that ‘not agreeing’ is the same as ‘vast lack of understanding’

    Well done on the bones thing..a similar thing happened to me when I pointed out (and got corrected hah!) the diagnostic matrices used for something that I had were likely to be life-threatening in cases like mine.. but I don’t claim to understand doctoring…

    05 Dec 2006, 14:01

  44. Woman

    Whats everyone complaining about? This is great news for truly intelligent women. It means they have “defied the odds” (don’t take that phrase seriously and dissect it for its lack of scientific worth because all you will demonstrate is the carcass of your lack of humour). If you are one of the few really intelligent women you are a much rarer thing than a really intelligent man. And that’s what I will be taking away from this article. Thats great news. And if you’re not one of them you’ll just have to face it. If you know your IQ then you would have been sort of aware of how smart you are anyway. The fact that there are more men with higher IQs – if you are a woman – doesn’t change that. Your IQ is SAFE. These facts, from the article, if they are true, will have been floating around in the ether for as long as IQ tests have been invented. Companies would have been aware of them when they hired, so more men would have been hired and promoted. The only dangerous thing about this article is if people use it to generalise and be mysognistic. If you’re a guy and you’re talking on first meeting to a woman you won’t necessarily know if she’s one of the most intelligent ones, or least (least might be more obvious). So, as long as no men out there let their minds assume when meeting women they’re NECESSARILY less smart than themselves, which is in the purest sense, STUPID, we’ll all be just fine. Sorry about the caps, don’t take offence. Or my possible abuse of the term purest. We’re all just people after all. Lets not define ourselves by our genders first, nor by our IQs. Jeez, I like the colour blue. So put me with all the other people whose favourite colour’s blue and rate our d**m IQs.

    05 Dec 2006, 14:22

  45. No, I don’t see your point “hero”, which doubtless you will take as a further “example” of feminine inferiority.

    I would rather that an argument like this, which started out as rational debate, did not get to a personal level where people were insulting individuals because they disagreed with the points they were making.

    You, on the other hand, have been consistently disparaging, insulting and downright rude both to me personally, and to the entirity of the female sex. You have been able to do this without fear of consequences because you are not logged in, and therefore cannot be traced. This is not about posting insults, (though if you can’t take it, don’t dish it out) I am merely asking why, if you are unwilling to put your name to your comments, should we be prepared to take you seriously?

    As to your comment, it may not have been insulting to your mind, but it was hideously sexist, derrogatory and therefore to my mind, insulting. It was also a crap piece of “poetry”, by the way, and as such also insulting to me, as I am an English and Creative writing student (not a sociologist) and can therefore tell the difference. That is why I deleted it.

    05 Dec 2006, 14:40

  46. Hero

    I agree.

    05 Dec 2006, 14:42

  47. Hero

    I meant I agree with woman….!

    After extensive research I have found the only directly insulting statement in the above discourse -

    Alexandra – “Hero” – you are a flaming troll. And I mean that in both the sense of someone getting pleasure from winding someone up online anonymously, and a neanderthal.

    Out of all the nice comments, I made all of them….”well done”, “beautiful”, and “sexy” I would have added ‘creative and imaginative’ in there, but you dissed my poem.

    05 Dec 2006, 14:48

  48. Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

    05 Dec 2006, 14:50

  49. You must have skimmed over your posts when looking for insults then.
    How about:

    “women don’t really excel at advanced intelligent thinking” (post 13)

    “I’m sick of this idea that we should hide the lesser intelligence of women because it makes women feel bad.” (post 13)

    “girls like the fun of regularly studying whether they learn something new or not (I call it the ‘organising coloured pencils’ approach).” (post 25)

    “women who fail in exams, the poor dears, must be feeling aw a little unconfident” (post 27)

    “What exams do test is the ability to perform under pressure/on demand. Women fail at it.” (post 27) – this would not be an insult were it true, but as is is a completely unfounded statement I have included it.

    “Alexandra is getting foot-stamping at her inability to manipulate me, and has now resorted to geeky name-calling! Perhaps I forgot to say how beautiful you are” (post 34)

    Every single post you have made has been either patronising, sarcastic or derogatory towards women. Several posts have been all three. Calling me “sexy” was obviously not meant to be a compliment, and not only do I find it patronising, but verging on sexual harrassment.

    It is the tone of your posts that is pissing people off here as much as your actual argument. Perhaps if you took a less biased and mysoginistic slant when you comment, people might not react so strongly, and we could keep this civilised.

    05 Dec 2006, 15:07

  50. Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

    I don’t care what anyone else in this thread says now, this is absolute winnage on a stick.

    05 Dec 2006, 16:04

  51. Hero

    What is wrong with my tone, honey?

    05 Dec 2006, 16:08

  52. Hero

    I think you have spelt whinage incorrectly luke.

    05 Dec 2006, 16:09

  53. Hero

    Sorry I will make the point that I was going to make, i.e. that you are hearing sarcasm because you feel bad/angry and are expecting to hear it.

    This is what often happens with non-verbal communication, so I forgive you.

    05 Dec 2006, 16:13

  54. I’ve already said: you’re being patronising.

    Please stop it.

    05 Dec 2006, 16:14

  55. Hero

    I can’t help it everything I do, and everything I say seems wrong!

    05 Dec 2006, 16:18

  56. I think George’s graph is excellent. My girlfiriend has boobies like the blue line, but I would like to make it clear that I wouldn’t turn down a lady with those of a red likeness.

    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

    Full marks for lightening the tone! :)

    05 Dec 2006, 17:36

  57. Luke wasn’t trying to spell whinage. He was trying to spell winnage meaning the comment is good. Meet youth slang, it has perhaps not reached your generation yet.

    (for the fact fans here I haven’t actually posted anything insulting on anyone’s blog, but you won’t know now because she has deleted it!)

    Not technically true, you have actually violated the AUP with a comment on a blog in the last few days, a comment which remains live. Fortunately the owner isn’t the type to care so won’t be reporting it. Not a good move considering you used a campus computer. Alex’s points are perfectly fair. Constructive debate can be had on this topic without the insults and insidious insinuations.

    05 Dec 2006, 17:48

  58. Kraut

    Hero, stop being a sarcastic, patronising, whiney bitch.

    Alex, stop getting wound up over nothing and hurling insults.

    Blimey, why can’t we have an intelligent discussion without it descending to the level of a playground slanging match? Stupid homo sapiens.

    05 Dec 2006, 19:24

  59. I’ve been reminded that there is one little detail in life which really casts huge amounts of doubt on the value of the IQ scale – Liam Gallagher has a higher IQ than Einstein!

    Although it would amuse me more if IQ really was a good indicator, and offstage Liam likes to sit down and do advanced mathematics and learn Chinese and quantum mechanics… that would be class.

    05 Dec 2006, 21:28

  60. Fred

    I’ve been reminded that there is one little detail in life which really casts huge amounts of doubt on the value of the IQ scale – Liam Gallagher has a higher IQ than Einstein!

    Really? Recent examples seem to indicate otherwise.

    06 Dec 2006, 00:33

  61. I’m not sure I get that. Should AJ be higher or lower than 145? It strikes me as about right.

    06 Dec 2006, 04:03

  62. Hero

    So is the graph right that the upper limit is about 140? if so that aj bloke is like well clever

    06 Dec 2006, 08:56

  63. Oh Hero, you are a silly old tart!
    The graph, does of course, refer to foot sizes. It has also been normalised.

    06 Dec 2006, 09:58

  64. But not really I just made up the variances.

    06 Dec 2006, 09:59

  65. Hero

    I see.. so in a post modernic twist this whole process has been an IQ test in itself! Wonderful I am a bit depressed though, because I thought for a moment that I was a genius’s genuis… hmmph

    06 Dec 2006, 10:19

  66. aj brown is retarded

    07 Dec 2006, 02:22

  67. AJ Brown

    Thanks Vincent – that’s very kind! ......

    I wrote the “Warwick People” interview in Summer and couldn’t think of anything else to put as my answer to the statement: “People are always surprised to learn this about me, but…” I took an IQ test a few years ago and my result was the only vaguely interesting thing that I could think to write down.

    In my view, IQ tests do seem pretty flawed and are a poor indicator of whether a person is actually “intelligent” or not. I’ve known people who have very high IQs but are barely able to string a sentence together or form an argument, and I’ve also known people who are incredibly intelligent and insightful but have a below-average IQ.

    14 Dec 2006, 23:13

  68. AJ Brown

    I’ve known people who have very high IQs but are barely able to string a sentence together or form an argument, and I’ve also known people who are incredibly intelligent and insightful but have a below-average IQ.

    I’ve never really known anyone with a high IQ I’d consider stupid. But I think one of my old Biology teachers expressed it perfectly when he said:

    There are plenty of intelligent people in the world, but there are very few clever people. Who are the clever people? They’re the intelligent people who know how to apply their intelligence.

    15 Dec 2006, 09:04

  69. Chris

    “you have actually violated the AUP with a comment on a blog in the last few days”

    It surprises me that students of all people who have always represented the vanguard of free speech write such things.

    This bloody AUP. It is MY opinion that ITS are a bunch of control freaks who assume they have the right to control what people say.

    People can think and say whatever the hell they like, attempts to incite violence not withstanding. People can be as idiotic, offensive, rude, and nasty as they want and that’s just how it is.

    Based on their “AUP” and their actions, ITS show shades of the extreme right. Interpret that how you will, it could just be a dumbed down flavor of what I’d really like to say….

    Furthermore ITS wouldn’t BE there without students and all their lovely money in the first place. So sod off and do your jobs.

    P.s Speaking from a personal standpoint, to whoever in ITS who came up with all this AUP garbage, I hate you.

    Chris

    19 Dec 2006, 14:53

  70. It surprises me that students of all people who have always represented the vanguard of free speech write such things.

    Perhaps if my statement had shown support, opposition, or indeed any form of comment on the matter then you could make that assumption. As it was I was merely pointing out a factual accuracy with no value judgement attached to it. My opinions on the AUP have not been mentioned anywhere in this post so kindly don’t go inserting words into my mouth or I’ll use my freedom of speech to say something rather rude, with only the sound of Voltaire in my ears cheering me on ;)

    19 Dec 2006, 15:26

  71. Hero

    Yes Holly, you only cite the AUP to ‘point out factual accuracy’ ... BS… you used it to try to supress opinions you disagree with.. which is a violation of the spirit of the AUP in itself.

    20 Dec 2006, 09:07

  72. Not at all, as I mentioned to you, posting from the network you were on makes you suspectible to the AUP and sanctions even if you post anonymously. How often in this debate did I use legitimate and thought out arguments to rebut your points? Several as it happens. Does this strike you as someone who wishes to repress views they disagree with? Hardly, trawl my blogs and you find an old debate I had once on there with a BNP member – left to stand, not deleted like someone who would repress freedom of speech.

    If you want to accuse me of repressing views I disagree with, go right ahead, but you won’t find a great amount of evidence for it. Violating that part of AUP can result in blogs being closed and ip addresses blocked, does giving you a warning that you’re straying close to getting a bit of a ban sound like a threat? Perhaps to you it does, I was hoping to frame it in such a way as to say don’t get banned, especially over a debate like this which can easily be carried out with views from all sides without getting anyone into trouble. Guess it all depends on how people choose to interpret the words of people they don’t know.

    20 Dec 2006, 11:11

  73. anonymous

    There’s a lot of violation of the spirit goes on in these blogs.

    20 Dec 2006, 18:13

  74. anonymous

    Don’t call me a nutter, if you don’t mind.

    20 Dec 2006, 18:14

  75. Are you a ‘bot’?

    20 Dec 2006, 20:16

  76. anonymous

    I can be if you want a scapegoat, you can grab me by the throat and ricochet me off the walls until I’m black and blue but you could never reciprocate the pain of the mass bullying brigade. You know who you are.

    20 Dec 2006, 22:14

  77. anonymous

    By the way, I have no idea what a bot is which I’m sure will please you even more…instant oneupmanship.

    20 Dec 2006, 22:17

  78. Anonymous how about making some sense sometime soon please.

    20 Dec 2006, 22:52

  79. A bot is just an AI. An artificial intelligence LOL!

    21 Dec 2006, 00:00

  80. As opposed to natural incompetence?

    21 Dec 2006, 00:31

  81. PRECISELY!

    21 Dec 2006, 01:14

  82. anonymous

    In that case I’m not a bot because there is nothing artificial about me, I’m just naturally incompetent.

    21 Dec 2006, 04:25

  83. anonymous

    get some soul!

    23 Dec 2006, 18:47

  84. anonymous

    ps, James – “are you a bot?” – Turing would be proud.

    23 Dec 2006, 19:33

  85. Touché

    24 Dec 2006, 12:44

  86. *

    i think the girls and the boys are intelligent, but the man is not more intelligent that a woman. i think
    is the same

    21 Jun 2007, 21:45


Add a comment

You are not allowed to comment on this entry as it has restricted commenting permissions.

Tweetme

Blog archive

Loading…

Galleries

November 2006

Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
Oct |  Today  | Dec
      1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30         

Tags

Most recent comments

  • JHVJL by SAMRSAG on this entry
  • Nothing surprises me any more. No wonder there is so little trust in these people. by Quinny Buzz on this entry
  • It really is a disgrace. by fisher price rainforest jumperoo on this entry
  • And now our police and security at Heathrow airport are not allowed to wear a small British flag on … by Quinny Buzz on this entry
  • Yes…get them out, completely change the government. Although I don't like the look of either party… by Hauck Infinity on this entry

Copyright Notice

Search this blog

Not signed in
Sign in

Powered by BlogBuilder
© MMXIX