/sci/ - Science & Math

What is the reason why five is greater than four if four is less than three?

>>11147928
Four isn't less than three but women are smarter than men

You know the reason.
Academia has always been a NO GIRLS ALLOWED white incel establishment super secret club. All the smart women in history triggered seething incels who then """"""""reused"""""""" (stole) their research e.g. Einstein's Serbian wife or white supremacists Watson and Cricket who were known for saying very racist stuff about black people in the university hallways.

It honestly hasn't been true in my experience. Most of the physics/math whizzes I know have been men, but there has been an exception, and nearly all of my mentors in bio and chem-with exceptions-have been women.
I look around sometimes at uni and notice for an instant that everybody in my class is female except for like 3 or 4 dudes including myself.
It just seems to me like physics, pure math, engineering, and compsci tend to be dudes, chemistry, vet science, nursing, biochem, and medicine tend to be all chicks, and geology and earth/climate sciences attract both for some reason. Not that I don't know a few dudes who are chemists or girls who like machines, but I think the sexes might be just as apt scientists with really different interests and tendencies.

Men and women are the same on average. The distribution is different though.

Women tend to cluster towards the middle, while men have more retards and more geniuses.

Since probably only the top 5-10% of people go into STEM, it makes sense that it would be mostly males.

>>11147951
basically this. women can be as smart as men, for sure. My PhD advisor is a women, extremely established, older, and was subjected to sexist bullshit and still managed to make it in academia because the work she produced was dogmatic for the subfield. even being systematically kept out, her brilliance shown through to the point of being recognized as valuable.

greater
male
variability

/thread

>>11147920
women like babies and makeup and gossip and dresses and cooking and decorating. men like trucks and guns an powertools and bulldozers.

this all goes way back to early childhood. and no, it isn't just conditioning. there are differences. just deal with it

these basic instincts are what explains why e.g. women dominate veterinary medicine whereas men dominate theoretical particle physics

>>11147974
>women like babies and makeup and gossip and dresses and cooking and decorating. men like trucks and guns an powertools and bulldozers
Fuck w*men and fuck m*n.

>>11147974
the fields in which women dominate are not as cognitively demanding as the fields men dominate in

https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2002-templer.pdf

Everyone should like physics, math, and arts (Roman, Greek).
Disney and petty entertainment companies should be thrown down the well.

because females are the sexual selectors, and some of them selected for men that wield technology
just like women don't directly use violence, they just have men do it for them

>>11147920
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK6rqm2nCzM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9Yn3i-DMKw

>>11147951
>>11147967
meanwhile in reality

>>11148002
>>11148002
>countries where they rape and cut off female dicks are the countries with the most female STEM graduates
Consider my almonds activated.

>>11148016

Same reason there aren't many female brick layers or carpenters.

>>11148041
no no no we need affirmative action so that more stay-at-home moms can become bricklayers. that would really raise women up wouldn't it

>>11147951
>Einstein's Serbian wife
Indeed. Look at her magnificent accomplishments after she and Albert split, versus his meager achievements.

There is actually no evidence she contributed in any way to his theories. She did badly in her exams and took no real interest in academics after she married.

This is just another feminist made-up story.

>>11147959
They rigged the IQ scoring to make women have the same scores, by overweighting the ability to produce verbalisms e.g. how many words can you think of starting with 'd'?

Even then they failed because they calibrated the tests on teenagers and it turns out that the male brain keeps growing well after women max out. So the fully mature male is on average significantly smarter, even on rigged tests, than the average woman.

>>11148090
That item type is not on most legitimate IQ tests. The studies I've seen for the Wechsler series show men performing better on the verbal (e.g. vocabulary and similarities) and perceptual (e.g. block design and matrix reasoning) subtests, with clear average female superiority only in processing speed.

>>11148002
Can I get the source for this? Im not outright calling you a liar, this just doesnt pass the smell test and I would be interested to see where it came from.

>>11148115
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797617741719

never apply common sense to women.

>>11148084
She was obviously still not herself from the breakup which is an experience you desperately need yourself to understand the genius Einstein's wife was, emotionless incel.
You can't ace exams with that broken heart, really.

Brains use energy to think, and men's bodies have more energy than women's bodies.

>>11148090

>by overweighting the ability to produce verbalisms e.g. how many words can you think of starting with 'd'?
Aren't modern IQ tests based on certain culture-neutral pattern recognition tasks, like Raven's Progressive Matrices?

>>11148115
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/02/the-more-gender-equality-the-fewer-women-in-stem/553592/

As a sidebar to the pointlessness of this entire thread:
>"What's the scientific reason for {thing}"
>"What's the evolutionary advantage of {thing}"
Am I the only one who would punch someone's face in if they said shit like that in person?

>>11148216
what is the scientific reason for punching people in the face for asking the evolutionary advantage of things?

>>11148115
>Can I get the source for this? Im not outright calling you a liar, this just doesnt pass the smell test and I would be interested to see where it came from.
>>11148121
>never apply common sense to women.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox
This is a lot of evidence that the more egalitarian a society the stronger the gender differences become, it isn't just in education.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUxY_5-N81Q

>>11147920
K.Hunt

>>11147951

Just a reminder to have sex guys

>>11148277
I was once loved by a woman. now they can all go to hell

>>11148125
holy fuck okay it wasnt at all clear whether you were trolling but I'll give you credit on this one. i kekd

>>11147994
holy shit these videos are pretty good and go very in depth. thanks for sharing

>>11147920
>brain scans don't lie
Because of stupidity like this assumption.

>>11147928
Tooker spitting facts. This is exactly what I mean.

>>11148115
You see a downwards line but the error margins are really big. I doubt that linear regression scores well on goodness of fit or RMSE.

>>11147920
Men often perform better on standardized metric tests concerning subjects like physics and math and are more inclined to go into it. Most of the girls I know who did something in STEM went into the medical sciences, nursery or similar.

I think societal factors (e.g. women for STEM campaigns, easier entrance into research positions for women and so on) play a role in the increase in women in STEM. They get into STEM purely due to them being women and having an easier time due to it since it reflects favorably upon the university in the current political climate in western Europe and US. Even better if the women has some color since that pleases diversity advocates as well. I still don't think most women would want to go into STEM since if you take the female median, that is below men. From earlier research (too lazy to look it up to cite it atm) it was also shown that women have a smaller standard deviation in their median scores than men do (meaning men have more outliers that are much higher and much lower).

The only way I can see it being solved is to just adhere to merit based testing which dictates who goes into STEM and who gets his or her degree. If you stop doing this, and try to force women or minorities into positions that they are simply not as qualified for you're not only getting incompetent researchers but you're denying entrance to people who are actually competent at the same time.

>>11148016
>female dicks

>>11147939
>women are smarter than men
any evidence of this?

>>11147967
>and was subjected to sexist bullshit

>>11147920
>minds are the same because of brains
lol

>>11147920
Women can be as smart as men.
BUT IF THEY DON'T FUCKING PICK STEM SCHOOL THEN SURPRISINGLY THERE WON'T BE AS MANTY WOMEN IN STEM WHAT A FUCKING SUPRISE

T. SOLITARY INCEL FORCED TO ENDURE YEARS OF NO FEMALES BECAUSE THEY WERE ALL GOING TO SHITTY USELESS SCHOOLS WHILE WE STARVED LIKE DOGS IN A DESERT

our books in natural science in high school explained it as such: men and women are, on average, just as smart, however men have a larger sd iq-wise. so men have more turbo retards, but also more geniuses. then there were some examples of where women/men tend to excel. if i recall correctly women were (for example) better when it comes to memory, while men were better at spatial stuff (not sure how to describe this, but imagine running and chasing something far away and having to judge how far away it is). then there were some discussions about physical differences in the brain itself. miss that high school

>>11147971
THIS
Men have a greater standard deviation in almost every statistical sense.
The exceptionally smart people, and the exceptionally dumb people are both disproportionately male.
That's also why exceptionally athletic women don't do as well as exceptionally athletic men in track and field events.

>>11148047
Don't you want more women in male dominated jobs?

>>11147920
The more egalitarian society the more they self select gender roles. It's simply a matter of Interest. If you want more women artificially in stem you have to basically train it more specifically to attempt yo force their choice into the field. Modern education system doesn't do this since most teachers don't have a stem background.

>>11147920
Why does it matter?
Why are you autists obsessed with comparing men and women?

>>11149128
It's the secondary, not-super-obvious /pol/ containment thread.
In case there's no "is race real?" thread.

>>11147920
Women are just as smart as men, broadly speaking. But not at the extreme ends, where men are infinitely stupider than women and infinitely smarter than women.

>>11149128
Because they're insecure incels and /pol/tards who would pop a fucking brain cell if they had to consider that their current state of neet-dom and general scumfuckery is their fault instead of the work of some nefarious scheme by da joos or some shit.

>>11149148

>>11149139
>implying /pol/ aren't a bunch of gynocentric cumbrains like sjw whiteknight soibois

>>11149148
t. gynocentric cumbrain

>>11147971
Men also have ~15-20% larger frontal lobes on average even normalized for weight.

>>11148002
That graph is drawing a line through a random dot plot and calling it a conclusion. Go back to basic science.

>>11149206
>a line through a random dot plot
are you retarded
>basic science
it's mathematics

>>11147951
based /sci/zos can’t understand a joke

>>11149139
Dogs didn't descend from wolves, though. They were created through human artificial selection, in other words, intelligent design.

>>11147920
women are intelligent, but they by and large lack passion.

>>11149206
>what are least squares

I read a study once that said it had to do with the toys we play with as kids. Boys tend to play with legos, trains and trucks (at least I did) so their brains develop to be better at spacial awareness and manipulating tangable things. Girls on the other hand tend to play with dolls or similar things and as a result tend to do better in English fields.

>>11147994
>6 hours of intense concentration for a purely mental fight
that's astounding

>>11149733
I think you have the causation reversed,
boys play with tangible things and girls play with dolls because that's what their brain structure is designed to do.

>>11147928
>Humans can be quantified by a single factor

Into the trash you go

>>11147974
Ok boomer

>>11147920
Anyone who has ever taken a stem class with women in it would know they survive by latching on beta orbiters and/or memorizing absolutely everything and generally lack the ability to understand abstract concepts as deeply and intuitively as men do.
There are some exceptions tho.

>>11147994
Man of culture

based

>>11149872
>Anyone who succeeds does so from memorizing while I am abstracting

Unfalisable and solipsistic thinking, that.

>>11149880
You literally see them memorizing everything and they literally tell you they did so when asked about how did they pass the class

>>11147920
>>11149908

Who lied to you? Seriously, who do you think Marie Curie was? The element CURIUM is named for HER. SHE named Polonium. She has TWO Nobel Prizes. Physics. Chemistry. In 1903 and 1911. Were you SLEEPING in class? There was JUST an all-woman SPACEWALK conducted by NASA. The first American woman in space, Sally Ride, did it in 1983.

There's EVEN an actual MOVIE about how NASA couldn't have made the moon landing if it weren't for the mathematical acumen of black women. It's even Oscar nominated.

You must have WILLFULLY ignored everydamnthing in your quest to think that women are idiots.

And that is just fucking pathetic.

>>11150083
cherrypicking or trolling?

>>11150083
>CURIUM HER SHE TWO SLEEPING JUST SPACEWALK NASA EVEN MOVIE NASA WILLFULLY
I can't crack the code.

>>11149845
Ok dilate

>>11149025
thats not true, we have a greater deviation, but we are also more talented on average amounting to more geniuses in every field, but not more incredibly dumb people. But as Women dont have as much drive to live and do they dont do as much and this leads to less increbly stupid actions.

Being boring saves them

>>11150083
you dumbfuck know, that the movie thing is propaganda?

the curie thing is due to mr. curies friend insisting she, who was at best an assistant, would be included in their papers to further the cause of feminism - why did she do jack shit after her husband died?

"women in space" there were dogs and monkeys and cats in space too, you can simply buy a flight to outer atmosphere nowadays

>>11150083
Curie and female astronauts have zero to do with the average female in the way that Bohr and male astronauts have nothing to do with the average male.

>>11147920
becuse all women are whores and cunts

watch a woman with a 150 IQ breeze through school, Suck Up a mountain of Awards Scholarships Placements Grants etc........... , watch people throw jobs and opportunities in her lap.

Same Woman hits 29, has a baby and decides. "I JUST WANT TO BE A MOMMY!" and sit at home watching soap operas LOL

Watch a guy maybe 10 IQ points behind her, who has to run in above's wake, picking up table scraps, that will gladly make the field his lifes work and wont bail come hell or high water.

Yes these are things i have seen

>>11147987
This doesn't count because Templer was a nazi

>>11147920
Women need to do the work. The universe doesn't care about your feelings. Stop blaming men when you do not win. Blame yourselfers learn from it and get better.

>>11147920
Because there are naturally many more male geniuses than female geniuses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis

>>11152048
lulz

richard lynn is probably a slavery apologist but quite often it takes a sociopathic asshole to speak truth on censured subjects because they don't care about the political/social death sentence for doing so

We dont really understand the brain very well, so its kind of silly to say we know that men and women are just as good at math. This isnt a scientist writing this but likely just a journalist trying to get clickbait

>>11147920
Woman are smarter.

>>11149872
I don't want to believe this, but you're correct in that it is all I've seen...

>>11147920
>get btfo
>pruned and deleted
>remake thread

>>11147920
Over millions and millions of years of evolution, humnas lived in tribes. Since newborns needed constant full-time care from women (long pregnancy, breastfeeding, et), the most viable way of structuring the tribal society was to have the men be out on the edge of the settlement, and have the women in the centre at the hearth, metaphorically speaking.

Women would care for the tribe, tend social cohesion, tend to the people living inside, raise the children while the men would protect from danger, fight, hunt etc. Since humans lived like this for millions of years, it left a mark on us evolutionarily: males are phisically stronger and they tend to enjoy solving problems, while womens have more empathy and compassion, better verbal skills, better understanding of psychology, of humans, etc. and they enjoy social activities.

For isntance, I had a friend who had something rough happen to him, the two girls in our social group consoled him and gave him a hug, while the three guys in our social group told him where he fucked up and how to make sure it does not happen again: in this group men tended to want to fix the problem at hand, while the women wanted to maintain social cohesion, console him and make sure the person is able to recompose himself and lead him back into a loving social environment.

This trend is visible when you look at what interest women and what interest men. Men are overrepresented in fields that focus on competition and problemsolving such as STEM, sports, sciences and entrepeneurship while women are overrepresented in fields that require compassion, social skills and working with people such as nurses, caregivers, social workers, accountants, secretaries, teachers etc.

Of course these are trends and not the absolute, there are STEM women, sport women and women CEO's just as there are male teachers male secretaries etc.

Women and menare both equally smart, women are just less drawn towards STEM.

>>11147920
The Patriarchy. Women are superior.
>>11147959
>>11147971
>>11152088
>B-But men are better on the upper tail
Cope incels

>>11152500
>pic related

>>11147994
>MGTOW youtubers
kek

>>11148090
>So the fully mature male is on average significantly smarter, even on rigged tests, than the average woman.
cope harder

>>11148582
All females have benis

>>11149872
This is literally my entire academic experience. It's also my professional experience as an actuary progressing through the exams.

Women truly are inferior.

>>11149148
These people are the equivalent to the people who shamed you for being a virgin in highschool. The douche-bags who fit in too well became liberal.

>>11153687
it might be a cope. some say that extra 15% of total brain volume, 3-5 billion more cortical neurons, extra 26km of myelinated fibers, greater glial cell numbers, etc on average in the male brain are just related to greater spatial ability. maybe not though

>>11147920
Women are useless and retarded. They are inferior to men.

I don't understand why it is so bad to accept certain differences based in gender.

I've ran into people who actually believe that women are physically as strong as men. Come on, the sooner we can just ACCEPT differences we can actually use those differences to excel at what we are good at. Instead there's this meme that everyone is the same and we can all be anything we want

>>11147920
Women don't care. Men have autistic focus even without being autistic, we can get obsessed with random shit for no reason and not let go until we solved the problem. I got obsessed for a few years with how to compute a triangle convolved with a 2D Gaussian function, after like 4 years I found the solution involving radial partitioning and an integral that depends on the partition radius, because I wanted to. Women literally never ever do this.

>>11154461
>I got obsessed for a few years with how to compute a triangle convolved with a 2D Gaussian function
a^2 + b^2 = c^2 dude Pythorias law was like 10th grade math. Are you actually retarded?

>>11154469
do you know what 2D convolution is you brainlet?

>>11154471
All triangles are 2D dude I know my fucking shapes. Sounds like you're the brainlet.

>>11154469
>Pythorias law was like 10th grade math

You mean you seriously didn't learn it in primary school?

>>11147920
>men tend to dominate STEM if women are just as smart
men have higher variance in IQ thus more outliers in the extremes + culture. The math effect is not present in asian cultures and can actually be increased when reminding western females that they are female before testing.

>>11147920
>if women are just as smart (if not smarter!!) than men
That's where you're wrong kiddo

https://www.bitchute.com/video/aPz9lZy5H3im/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/EiY9w951uSg/

>>11147920
Oppression + lack of support. Try to keep up, buddio.

>>11147920
>the law of sines is written 3 times
I guess she really liked that one.

>>11154532
that's nothing, she also figured out that the hypotenuse of a triangle is the sum of the two other sides, check top right corner

>>11149840
>t. butthurt 1

>>11154480
You sound very American. The keyword here is convolution. Like pic related except with a triangle instead of a square.

>>11155250
Can't you just use a 2d Fourier transform for that?

>>11155652
That's the same thing in this case.

>>11147920
Female intelligence is mostly verbal

>>11155685
Then why do women never seem to know what they're talking about even when what they're saying is factually correct?

>>11148165
There are different subtests on most IQ tests and verbal IQ remains one on almost all of them, which is good because it's the best test of I think fluid IQ? I don't really remember the details, but verbal IQ is real, it's just somewhat distinct from other forms of IQ

>>11148216
It's just a mechanism to post off topic threads that look like they're on topic This thread is actually meant to be a "post about why you hate women thread", nothing to actually do with science or math

>>11155737
cope, "women aren't in stem because of discrimination/we need to achieve gender parity in top intellectual professions because the gap isn't biological/inevitable" is a pernicious philosophy which you can hardly go a day without encountering in some form from the media, nevermind if you're actually involved in academia

>>11148084
What has Einstein achieved?

>>11155750
the whole women in stem meme is fucking retarded, but this thread is just an excuse to turn the board into /pol/

>>11155751
Besides injecting your head with mass in energy.

Before him, physics was about hydraolic press, not motherfuckers with letters.

>>11155757
Wait? It was idea of his wife? Like idea of couples verbal intelligence that doesn't accepts physics, because she thinks crowd is natural?

>>11155759
Which would be right if you connect nature and natural on IQ test.

Just one fraud to blame.

>>11147920
A large part of the difference is due to autism being roughly four times as prevalent in men as in women. The specialised research positions are mostly occupied by spergs with a singular, obsessive interest in the subject they study. Their ability to completely shut out everything else and hyperfocus on a single narrow subject for extended periods of time make spergs natural specialists, which means they can outcompete their neurotypical counterparts for grants, and thus dominate the field. Physics and maths in general contain high numbers of mega autists who can barely hold a conversation, but understand the most unintuitive concepts naturally.
This is likely part of the male variance phenomenon, as there are several evolutionary advantages to having a low number of specialists in a neolithic tribe, such as higher quality tools and clothing or knowledge of prey movement and behavior. Having these traits on women however would be suboptimal as much of their adult life would be spent birthing and rearing children, which would negatively impact any complex work the individual was tasked with. Since these variants always run a higher risk of producing defects its also logical to have them on the more expendable sex, and not on the reproductive limiting factor.

>>11150083
Fairly sure that's pasta guys

>>11147959

This is the entire thread. A lot of mysterious pervasive social trends aren't so mysterious anymore when you have a basic understanding of bell curves, but NPCs refuse to believe cognitive variations of any kind exist between populations.

>>11147967
> My PhD advisor is a women
this isn't a red flag for you?

>>11148090
And yet you still cannot get laid.

>>11147920
women excel at doing pointless monotonous tasks that are meaningless while gossiping and making drama, stem just has the meaningless monotony

>that pic
I thought women were better at most math that normal people use

>>11157442
M.O.B

>>11149206
lmfao this post can't be real. Are you literally 14?

>>11147920
> if women are just as smart (if not smarter!!) than men?
protip: they aren't

>>11157545

>>11157336
Did you miss the rest of the post? She was in the lab that discovered a whole class of molecules. You saying random stuff doesn't make it true, she's probably worth more than you'll make in a lifetime, and is undoubtedly more intelligent.

>>11155751
>started quantum mechanics
>special relativity
>general relativity
>patent for a fridge process design
>explained asymmetric erosion in river going from north to south or vice versa
>explained Brownian motion
>built the foundation for lasers
>helped the development of quantum mechanics extremely by asking the right questions
These are just off the top of my head. Lotta more. All while being a total stud.
Pic related, Einstein on his way to fuck your bitch.

social factors= women don't want to go into a field that is a total sausage fest.

>>11148275
Maybe, but there's a seed of truth in there

If their whole evolution was based on just raising offspring what's the point of them being smart? There's no benefit, even if they're retarded as shit they'll still be able to reproduce. They just have to find someone to take care of them. Women are dumber because they chose the stagnant role of the caretaker. Centuries after centuries after centuries. If women were smart they wouldn't try to coexist with an entity that is stronger than them in every single way. It's like trying to be civil with an gorilla. Keep sucking dicks and cleaning diapers stupid bitches.

>>11157548
>Paul Coojimans says
into the trash it goes

>>11147974
Why is it not conditioning? We never give girls toy tool sets and cars when they are young, and we generally don't show them tv shows that aren't fluffy, pink, and girly. You sound like a Boomer or incel. Either look past your obvious flaws in logic or kill yourself so we can all progress as a society.

>>11149149
Lol at this pic

>>11158992
because girls don't go after trucks like boys do. the same is true with monkeys as with with humans. you sound like the boomer here. it was under boomers that feminism happened.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bm9xXyw2f7g

>>11149206
You ever take a course in statistics? Faggot

>>11149812
You sound like a retarded faggot.

>>11149812
this.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/07/160715114739.htm
>Children as young as 9 months-old prefer to play with toys specific to their own gender, according to a new study. The research suggests the possibility that boys and girls follow different developmental trajectories with respect to selection of gender-typed toys and that there is both a biological and a developmental-environmental components to the sex differences seen in object preferences.

>>11159010
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/icd.2064
>From an early age, most children choose to play with toys typed to their own gender. In order to identify variables that predict toy preference, we conducted a meta‐analysis of observational studies of the free selection of toys by boys and girls aged between 1 and 8 years. From an initial pool of 1788 papers, 16 studies (787 boys and 813 girls) met our inclusion criteria. We found that boys played with male‐typed toys more than girls did (Cohen's d = 1.03, p < .0001) and girls played with female‐typed toys more than boys did (Cohen's d = −0.91, p < .0001). Meta‐regression showed no significant effect of presence of an adult, study context, geographical location of the study, publication date, child's age, or the inclusion of gender‐neutral toys. However, further analysis of data for boys and girls separately revealed that older boys played more with male‐typed toys relative to female‐typed toys than did younger boys (β = .68, p < .0001). Additionally, an effect of the length of time since study publication was found: girls played more with female‐typed toys in earlier studies than in later studies (β = .70, p < .0001), whereas boys played more with male‐typed toys (β = .46, p < .05) in earlier studies than in more recent studies. Boys also played with male‐typed toys less when observed in the home than in a laboratory (β = −.46, p < .05). Findings are discussed in terms of possible contributions of environmental influences and age‐related changes in boys' and girls' toy preferences.

>>11154461
>Look at me I'm so smart I can say math things duuooyyy
People like you are cringe beta retards

well here in the Diverse States of America, here's the answer: THEY SIMPLY ARE NOT FUCKING INTERESTED, how do i know? i go to university myself, to them it's one giant 4 year long orgy in a bunch of buildings they call a campus, mystery solved everyone. and no it's not because STEM doesn't let women in, I'm in STEM and desperately trying to get more women in, but they just dont want to fucking do it, they rather suck cock, jello shots and lines of blow simultaneously.

>>11159010
>>11159016
>>11149812
just one detail, evolved to do.

>>11147920
i won't say it's necessarily bullshit,but the kids just watched sesame street wherein they added/multiplied some numbers,so basically the kids didn't think at all,just watched how they do math in the film...and also the age limit was 10...at that age boys and girls are in the same team in most teamsports,because the biological differences are not that big,but later it becomes bigger ofc
do this test again with kids equally educated and of an older age,scan their brain while they are doing math tasks,and if the result is the same i guess it's true then

>>11148458
kek I know that fucking feel bro

>>11149872

I go to a top 50 university so this seems to be less of an issue, but usually ~20-25% do this. All the biology majors have to take up to calculus II and never in my life have seen so many bricks being shat kek

>>11147920
Differences in motivations explain most gender differences observed. It doesn’t matter if you have theoretical equal IQ or a negligible difference. The motivation difference are most extreme when looking at sub cultures, especially ones with zero barrier to entry. Women can’t seem to explain their under representation in areas with no barriers to their participation.

>>11148458
reminds me of the time when i was a very little kid and i touched a radiant cooktop when it was glowing. i learned very quickly to never do that again. i heard similar stories from other people, some of whom did it more than once with the same result. took them a bit longer to realize it's all the same. now sure some will argue not all cooktops are made equal; some glow with different colors, are painted differently, and they come in a variety of shapes and sizes. that is true but they all do the same thing at the end of the day.

>>11147987
>https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2002-templer.pdf
Why do chicks love accounting so much? Isn't that mathematic heavy?

>>11147920
Its so simple, its literally because the bell curve for men's intelligence is wider. So there are dumb men way beyond the dumbest female, and smart males way beyond the smartest females.
Also bigger brain=higher power and slower connections. A man ponders at a higher power level but slower.

Do you really think it was just sheer-raw-gender-granted intelligence that makes better mathematicians out of men? That's so fucking funny. Do you really think that the reason people get good thing is just some inherent gift in their brain structure and chemistry? Have you never become good at anything in your life?

It is interest. It is interest in a subject matter which drives a person's brain to become so incredible at it. Learning math, and creating new mathematical theorems is a product of, yes, IQ, that raw and timeless pattern recognition skill, but also energy spent on it. You really think that a 21 year old with 160 IQ who just happened to never be interested in math, and therefore never learned even calculus would score better on a graduate level math exam than a 40 year old man with 140 IQ that is intensely interested in math, and has studied it intensely, for countless hours, because he just loves it so much, and has a PhD?

Of course the 160 IQ man wouldn't score as well, he wouldn't even be able to begin, he wouldn't have those centuries of theorems stored up, processed, and integrated, to apply to the problems put before him.

Men have been better at math, because they have been more interested in it. More of the intelligent men get sucked into it, and more men put more energy into it. It's not that their manly essence makes them super good at doing numbers. Why are they more interested? Simple. Autism.

>>11162393
>2019
>not enjoying induction cooktops
inb4 no woman is an induction cooktop.

>>11162864
but no woman is an induction cooktop, you're thinking of ai waifubots that have yet to be developed.

>>11162562

people are only interested in things they are good at. How many midgets are interested in becoming basketball player?

yeah but

>>11162408
Mostly laws and bureaucracy and stuff, the math is done by a computer/calculator.

I want a woman to dominate me

>>11162562
>Do you really think it was just sheer-raw-gender-granted intelligence that makes better mathematicians out of men?

In part, absolutely. Smart people tend to underestimate how difficult it is for most to think about stuff that comes normally to them and how much more effort it takes for them to imagine the same things. This doesn't mean that genius is by any means effortless, but this stuff helps immensely.

>It is interest.
But not interest alone.

>>11154488
You didn’t learn this until primary school?

>>11163392
sick man

>>11159021
Someone wasn't invited to any of those orgies.

>>11163392
Same

>>11147920
Women cant into non emotional logical thinking, to women their retarded feelings are always fact which is why all women are completely insane. The few women good at STEM have completely alien brains compared to the average female.

>>11147920
Recruitment pool.
On average more men tend towards scientific topics as general interests
A small part of them go on to try and make it a career where most men must select a career in Western standards of masculinity.
Less women in general interested in scientific topics.
A small part of them select it for a career.
Many women belong to cultural subgroups where having a job is not expected.

>>11163269
>Will never lie or try to deceive you

>>11147920
being smart =/= choosing stem

>>11148257
it's because men are inferior in general.

whereas women can excel in all fields, most men are autists who can only do STEM

so they all pile into STEM, the only place their coombrained minds can thrive, while women tend to be evenly spread among disciplines

after a while, STEM is overrun by neckbeards and smelly brainlets, which repels women

the cure to the gender gap is extra remedial education for boys to bring them up to speed in verbal reasoning

>>11147967
>tfw grad student
>attend a conference with my advisor
>at one point during a conversation, an older prof mentions offhand that my secretary is cute
first time i realized the whole sexism thing might not totally made up after all

>>11166165
>at one point during a conversation, an older prof mentions offhand that my secretary is cute
>sexism, oppression!!!1
Your advisor is a brave soul for fighting in the lion's den of white supremacist incels that are trying to hold her down.

>>11166165
>at one point during a conversation, an older prof mentions offhand that my secretary is cute
Stories like this and things like "my boss doesn't take me seriously" or "my students didn't assume I have a PhD" are the "obstacles" that women face in their STEM careers when you boil it down. That this is the basis for the massive push of women in STEM is a fucking joke.

>>11147920

In my country it is usually the women are who have higher scores in entrance tests, perform better in school etc. Medical schools have higher cutoff grades for women vs men since the girls that apply seem to have really good GPAs. Like they need a minimum of 1.5 vs 1.75 for men.(based on a grading scale where 1 is the highest, 3 is the passing grade).

>>11148125
It never stopped me. It was my incessant procrastination that stopped my passing of exams

>>11151817

Literally my mom. She is a good mommy though and tutored me throughout my school life. I thank god for passing down her intelligence onto me.

>>11147971
>>11147967
>>11147959
Friendly reminder that a Harvard president (Lawrence Summers) was forced to resign after he mentioned that this might partially explain why there are more male STEM professors at Harvard than female STEM professors. Feminism is a psychotic hate movement

>>11148002
Because the Y-axis doesyt measure "equality" it measures female privilege. So that graph is more accurately interpreted as showing that as women gain even more privilege they are less likely to choose difficult and challenging career paths, opting instead for some meme like Women's Studies or Sociology since women don't have any responsibilities in those countries

I wonder how many female theoretical biologists there are.

>>11166213
relax anon, it was just a small observation

>>11166240
out of curiosity, what exactly do you believe?
that women actually have less merit on average, so the discrimination they perceive is justified?
or that they have equal merit, but there isn't any actual discrimination against them?

>"obstacles"
the thing is, when that old guy is on the tenure committee or asked to vote on new faculty, he's going to decide based on merit, or the perception of merit, as he should.
but if he unironically believes (like many ITT) that women just can't into science it wouldn't make sense for him to ever recommend one for a position. this logic doesn't seem controversial to me, so where am i going wrong?

you look at god tier researchers like liskov with h-index 60+, hundreds of papers, several of which had extremely high impact
https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/liskov_1108679.cfm

she's not a SJW going around tooting the sexism horn, but when asked about it...
>In the 10 years before I was head of computer science at MIT, the department identified only one woman worth hiring. When I was the head [from 2001 to 2004], I hired seven women. We didn’t scrape the bottom of the barrel. All three junior women I hired are outstanding. There was a long period of time where women were not considered at all.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/barbara-liskov-is-the-architect-of-modern-algorithms-20191120/
it seems a bit strong to assume that she's just lying her ass off

>>11148257
Social expectations for genders vary by large degrees even in modern democratic societies that lack de Jure gender discrimination.

>>11149908
>Antecedent

>>11166165
>>11166494
>cherry-picking
and
>but if he unironically believes (like many ITT) that women just can't into science it wouldn't make sense for him to ever recommend one for a position. this logic doesn't seem controversial to me, so where am i going wrong?
meanwhile in reality:
https://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360

>>11166110
>STEM is overrun by neckbeards and smelly brainlets, which repels women
>men are inferior in general
lol, so women are superior because they act emotionally rather than rationally.
>while women tend to be evenly spread among disciplines
lol, pic related.

>>11147920
>brain scans?
>iq?
>intellectual superiority?
women are nazis.

>>11148125
>obviously still not herself f
Feminists: making excuses since forever

>>11148165
>Raven's Progressive Matrices?
I did an official IQ test with a psychologist a few years ago and it had all that stuff e.g. finding lots of words.

So, no.

>>11153687
> cope harder

Powerful argument bro'

>>11157442
> get laid

I am so blown away by the sagacity of your arguments.

>>11166785
>lol, so women are superior because they act emotionally rather than rationally.
You didn't even understand his post anon

>>11166777
>he likes PNAS
Me too.
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/31/15435

Based on PISA scores of 300,000 15-year old students (but it wouldn't be surprising to see subject GPA studies bear the same result), we get this evidence (pic related):
In both boys and girls, it's not math skill or reading skill, but _the difference between them_, that predicts intention to study math.

Among top scorers, the reading gap gets even larger, i.e. the better the boy is at math, the shittier he is at reading when compared to girls of the same math tier. Not going to call it autism but just as a side note g is far more strongly correlated with verbal skill than with quantitative reasoning.

Interpretation: People prefer to do what they're good at, and avoid what they suck at. Thus, boys overwhelmingly select the sciences. Even without the negative societal pressure, less women would select STEM, proportionally, because within any given tier of math skill, the girls outperform the boys at reading, leading them to feel comfortable pursuing a wider range of disciplines on average.

Conclusion: the STEM gender gap is more about the boys than the girls. Improved reading / verbal skills training for boys at a young age could change their propensity to hard funnel themselves into the sciences.

>>11166850
>You didn't even understand his post anon
i did, fren. the point i as making was mocking how ridiculous it is to pick your study based on whether or not you're "repulsed" by your peers instead of what interests you, you're good at (related as you pointed out) and gives you the best job prospects.

>>11166390
Source?

>>11166963
http://archive.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2006/02/22/summers_to_step_down_ending_tumult_at_harvard/

>>11147920

K-12 Science and Math
>Follow directions and remember shit
Undergrad-Masters STEM
>Follow directions and perform basic critical thinking
Professional STEM
>Follow directions and use excel spreadsheets
Academic STEM
>spend 95% of your entire life trying to turn lead into gold so you can become the next Einstein or Von Neumann which only several hundred or so humans have achieved since the birth of civilization.

The last one is the hardest sell to a woman and it shows. All the other shit is simply a matter of time.

>>11148090
I can't tell you how many married couples I've talked to where the man was intelligent and interesting and the wife just stood there like a robot with a dead battery and struggled to contribute anything relevant. They are good at tests and rote memory though.

>>11166400
This, the graph shows that Scandinavian women have it easy in life.

>>11167148
Based

>>11166828
>simple bait
>virgins keep falling for it
Classic /sci/

>>11167563
have sex

>>11147920
cause they're too busy continuing the species instead of being STEM incels

>>11153687
>your facts are cope for my feelings
based stem thot

>>11168727
I have it frequently with my gf of five years.

How the fuck is this thread still going