The Truth is Unacceptable in Academe...

Discussion in 'Education' started by DGS49, Sep 8, 2018.

  1. DGS49
    Offline

    DGS49 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2012
    Messages:
    6,271
    Thanks Received:
    1,322
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    Ratings:
    +5,460
    (1). There are certain careers that require truly superior intelligence, not just being "smart." Math or engineering professor. Actuary. Patent attorney. Certain IT design fields.

    (2). The dispersion of male intelligence is wider than the dispersion of female intelligence. So you will find more men with IQ's over 150 than women, and you will find more men with IQ's under 60 than women. Women's variability is not as widely distributed.

    (3). So you will find that men dominate in those careers where superior intelligence is required. IT IS NOT THE RESULT OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST QUALIFIED WOMEN.

    Policy makers who try to craft the "rules" so that women will be represented equally at all levels of success end up making bizarre concessions and allowances to force an unnatural result.

    Since women dominate the population of colleges and universities, "they" have concluded that their dearth in the aforesaid areas MUST BE THE RESULT OF DISCRIMINATION, and any research that implies that it is natural and not discrimination...well, that research must be suppressed.

    And what this has to do with housewives eludes me. There are genius car mechanics (men) and there are genius housewives (women) but those people have nothing to do with this discussion.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. Asclepias
    Offline

    Asclepias Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    Messages:
    89,045
    Thanks Received:
    7,760
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Breathing rarified air.
    Ratings:
    +30,395
    True you can but if you dont that in no way implies you are not intelligent. For starters there has to an interest in doing those things. Secondly they require training that women may not have traditionally have had access to or it was socially unacceptable. Not too long ago I remember women were expected to be nurses not doctors. Its asinine, extremely poor science to say because one group of people typically have not had the expectation, training or desire to go into a field that they are less intelligent. What kind of idiot would even subscribe to such a notion? A better premise would be to study fields where there are equal amounts of women and men that have traditionally been trained for and desire to be in those fields. Tradition, social expectations, training, and desire all count as variables in determining the field people go into. Personally its my belief that women are way more intelligent than men.
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2018
  3. Asclepias
    Offline

    Asclepias Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    Messages:
    89,045
    Thanks Received:
    7,760
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Breathing rarified air.
    Ratings:
    +30,395
    "IT IS NOT THE RESULT OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST QUALIFIED WOMEN."

    How long have women been encouraged, allowed, and expected to achieve a career in the fields you listed?

    I work in the IT field and the discrimination the women get in my specific skill set is mind boggling.
     
  4. DGS49
    Offline

    DGS49 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2012
    Messages:
    6,271
    Thanks Received:
    1,322
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    Ratings:
    +5,460
    Asclepias, allow me to give you a responsive answer.

    For AT LEAST the past forty years, girls in our grade schools and high schools have been strongly encouraged to take up and pursue the "STEM" subjects. In many cases, the subject matter itself, as well as the grading, has been modified to encourage girls to continue. I saw with my own son (who attended a high-end public school) that math and science coursework was watered down and made more "verbal" and less quantitative, as was the grading, entirely so that girls would be more comfortable with it. Getting the correct answer was devalued to the same level has having a nice presentation of your answer. As if...

    And as the "girls" continued in these subjects, their success in the quantitative aspects was in most cases marginal. Female engineers RARELY obtain the P.E. designation, which requires high quantitative skills and knowledge, and when they get into their careers it is almost never in design or technically demanding jobs, but rather in project management, project administration, marketing support and sales.

    They are not being discriminated against, but are rather finding their level, according to aptitudes and abilities. Big companies as we find in Silicon Valley put women in technical positions due to social engineering goals, but they are protected against their own technical weaknesses by top-down management directives, and their male co-workers take up the slack.

    Speaking in generalities here, of course. Among 150 million or so women in this country, I'm sure there are some technical geniuses. A smattering.
     
  5. Asclepias
    Offline

    Asclepias Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    Messages:
    89,045
    Thanks Received:
    7,760
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Breathing rarified air.
    Ratings:
    +30,395
    So youre basing this on an admittedly short time span of at least 40 years? How many centuries where these fields were primarily the province of men? Are you starting to get my point?

    40 years 50 years 60 years doesnt undo centuries of discrimination even if you are naive enough to believe it stopped 40 years ago. It doesnt undo centuries of social expectations which cause certain groups to take less interest in specific fields. Until we can get a comparable amount of time where the situation is reversed we cant say with any certainty that one group on average is more intelligent than the other. There are way to many factors and variables this clown in particular hasnt taken into account.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2018
  6. Fort Fun Indiana
    Offline

    Fort Fun Indiana Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2017
    Messages:
    15,419
    Thanks Received:
    1,079
    Trophy Points:
    265
    Ratings:
    +7,211
    Your conclusions are unfair and overwrought. There is plenty of discussion in the academic world right now about this. And your attempt to characterize all of academia with your hamhanded, superstitious partisanship is absurd.

    Here, I'll do it too:

    Look here at how religious nuts act, the rare times they can size upon a problem in the academic world. They are abviously all lying charlatans, and only make these threads in the hopes of smearing the pursuit of knowledge that inevitably relevates their magical hoo-ha to the trash of history.
     
  7. AbdulAhad
    Offline

    AbdulAhad Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2018
    Messages:
    3
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    calm down dear and hire the professional consultant who can give the proper guidance.
     
  8. DGS49
    Offline

    DGS49 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2012
    Messages:
    6,271
    Thanks Received:
    1,322
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    Ratings:
    +5,460
    The truth (facts) are neither fair nor unfair. What one does with the truth can be fair or unfair.

    If I make a list of the top musical composers in Western Civilization (Mozart, Brahms, Beethoven, Bach, etc.), one might note that none of them are women. This is a fact.

    It may be that if Western culture were structured differently in the past, there would be an equal number of women in the Greatest List, but that is not the case. Reality bites. So the solution is to ensure that women are not held back or discriminated against TODAY, so that if there is a budding Mozart out there, she will be able to flower into her total potential.

    The solution is NOT to pretend that various third-rate female composers from the past are on par with the greatest who ever lived. They are not.

    As for the article at the top of this thread, it contains a very tenable scientific analysis of why men seem to be at the top of professions and categories where optimum intelligence prevails. It is not a matter of discrimination against women, but rather the predominance of men at the very top of the iQ scale - a phenomenon that is clearly explained and detailed. At the same time, it explains why men predominate in prisons and looney bins, a fact that women feel quite comfortable with.

    If this FACT makes certain women uncomfortable, they need to get over it. Do white boys disdain playing basketball because American caucasians are rare among NBA starters? Do they deny that the demographics of the NBA are a reflection of meritocratic processes? No. They do their best and rise to the highest levels that their talent and abilities allow. Women in STEM fields need to take the same approach. Maybe they will become the "Larry Bird" of actuaries or Grand Chess Masters or musical; composers. You never know.
     

Share This Page