Well, if you were in Iraq, you probably wouldn't get to go to school at all. On top of my head, just look at all the Olympic medalists in math/science (mostly dude winners). What about Nobel prize winners? again, mostly dudes.
And here I thought KO would be biased enough to accept this proposal, but on entirely different grounds .
Education is one facet of life. Both men and women have differing strengths and weaknesses and to declare one sex blatantly outranking another is a tad naive and will never be "provable" nor a worthwhile pursuit since there are exceptions on either side. Both sides have superior examples of people rising above what we consider the average person.
As far as education, it does appear in some regard that women are statistically (meaning the average) higher than men in intelligence. But there are also more women than men on the planet. Although the population stats are not far apart as percentages, when you start applying such statistics, you have to realize its on a billions scale and that you cannot necessarily compare a larger demographic to the smaller straight up.
You also further reduced your representative sample to New Zealand. I'm sure you could find many countries where the statistics on average are reversed.
Essentially we need more conclusive argumentation to support your position before I or some others will accept it as a plausible (albeit absurd- see first paragraph) assertion.
Any half intelligent ape can see that females only started fairing better since examination methods were changed.
In this country, the UK, male exam results were always better. To combat Male domination, "course work" was introduced. Course work is assessed over the course of the year via essays and practical work rather than one or more exams.
Females started to achieve better results with this method, at the expense of the male students.
Nobody knows why males are better at exams and females are better when assessed over a long period. Some people attribute it to a woman’s greater organisation and presentation skills as well as a mans apparent superiority in "grasping" a concept which would suit an exam style assessment.
One thing is for sure, neither one of these methods are a 100% guarantee that one sex is more intelligent than the other. Merely, it means we all shine in different circumstances.
Posts: 1045 | Location: England | Registered: 04-13-02
I heard an ex examiner of the 11plus describe how pass marks had to be different for girls and boys. He explained that if grammar schools, which had limited available places, were to take in the top whatever percentile, there would be far too many girls in the schools. To remedy this problem the girls' pass mark was higher than the boys'.
11plus no longer happens in England, Wales and Scotland. It does in N. Ireland.
Don't think the fact that girls grow up being told that they are not as good at/interested in maths/science/physical education skews the results of any studies much?
Posts: 5633 | Location: Aotearoa (New Zealand) | Registered: 09-22-02
I would agree that certain societal biases might skew some results but can you really tell someone they aren't interested in something and keep them from being interested? You might prevent them from openly pursuing it but will you really erase the interest in the majority of cases?
Physical education differences are simply a matter of evolutionary development. Girls tend to be better in these aspects at earlier ages because they mature faster but once boys begin to mature and develop more around, at, and after puberty, the far majority (note, not all, there are many many many exceptions) can out-compete their opposite gender on sheer strength or physical prowess alone.
I know from personal experience that my senior year in track and field in highschool saw a drop of several seconds in all my races for no reason I could ascertain because I didn't change my training habits from previous years and especially did very little over the summer. On our team there were one or two girls that could compete to a point with the faster guys (a few years after I graduated the girls 4 by 400 meter relay had a staggering time of 3:56 in one race, meaning that the average lap for each girl was 59 seconds. Thats phenomenal (especially since I know at least one in particular was probably faster and lowered that average for the rest)). My times my senior year in this race settled down to 52 seconds flat without additional training (I'm sure if I had really exerted myself I might have made it to 50 or below 50 seconds).
In fields of intelligence it may depend on the tests given as to how the various sexes perform but can you make a truly gender neutral test that will accurately set standards for each gender and show the differences between genders? I think this task would be much much harder (but not altogether impossible. The real question is can you get either of the sexes to develop a non-biased test without influencing the results subconsciously at least?).
I would agree that certain societal biases might skew some results but can you really tell someone they aren't interested in something and keep them from being interested? You might prevent them from openly pursuing it but will you really erase the interest in the majority of cases?
Malcolm X wanted to be a lawyer, but had a change heart when his teacher told him that black men couldn't be lawyers. He instead went out on his own into the crime world where he was was caught and placed in jail. Imagine if the teacher told him he could be anything as long as he dreamed of it hard enough. instead he learned it a little late while he was in prison. When your young and yet have to learn to dream big then you pretty much listen to those around you.
quote:
Physical education differences are simply a matter of evolutionary development. Girls tend to be better in these aspects at earlier ages because they mature faster Girls tend to be better in these aspects at earlier ages because they mature faster but once boys begin to mature and develop more around, at, and after puberty, the far majority (note, not all, there are many many many exceptions) can out-compete their opposite gender on sheer strength or physical prowess alone.
Not always true. Girls share closer relationships with their parents at an early age and this has a major impact on their education. Boys tend to keep their distance from their parents at an early age.
This impacts their behavior and their maturity levels. So at some point Asa could be correct, but the problem could be solved if mothers would stay home and baby sit their boys rather then handing them a remote and a video game. Now don't take this the wrong way, but this goes for the men too. Fathers could stay home too, but no everyone want's to work these days and some don't have a choice. This affects a young males education.......
....and to answer you last question, no, it'll always be biased because their looking for the best not the equal.
"If you disagree with something I write, tell me so, argue with me, correct me - but don't tell me to shut up. That's not the American way." -Roger Ebert
Posts: 622 | Location: Tionesta Pennsylvania, USA | Registered: 09-22-05
There might be some data to support the notion that girls are "better" than boys. The word better is better suited to describe behavior between the two genders rather than aptitude or intelligence. I would tend to agree that girls are better behaved than boys.
There is statistical data to support the fact that men earn more money than women earn in the U.S. (but I don't have the data at the moment). I had earned more than my wife until about three years ago but her annual earnings have exceed my earnings subtantially in the past three years. (My employer offers more lucrative benefits and her employer pays more in salary.)
Posts: 2642 | Location: The Volunteer State | Registered: 06-25-03
My point was only that we have very little basis for presuming that the psychological differences we see in men and women - including some different brain structures - are genetic in origin rather than a product of the extremely different ways we treat boys and girls from birth onwards. The brain is a very plastic organ, we mustn't get too carried away pretending we know any 'innate' psychological characteristics of one gender or the other. We must not forget there is probably more variation across gender barriers than within them.
Posts: 5633 | Location: Aotearoa (New Zealand) | Registered: 09-22-02
Originally posted by Fuzzies: My point was only that we have very little basis for presuming that the psychological differences we see in men and women - including some different brain structures - are genetic in origin rather than a product of the extremely different ways we treat boys and girls from birth onwards. The brain is a very plastic organ, we mustn't get too carried away pretending we know any 'innate' psychological characteristics of one gender or the other. We must not forget there is probably more variation across gender barriers than within them.
You're almost certainly right in calling out assumptions.
However, sociological conditioning being the reason the sexes are perceived to have different brains being true or false, it still boils down to people perceiving one sex to be more intelligent than the other, whatever the reasons.
I will assume we agree that there are no methods in existence as of now that can answer the question.
I will also claim that the thread starter is full of shiz to bring up such a flawed argument.
Posts: 1045 | Location: England | Registered: 04-13-02
Originally posted by Skeg: I will also claim that the thread starter is full of shiz to bring up such a flawed argument.
Skeg, I would not use that exact language on a topic starter even if I was convinced the topic starter was full of shiz.
I would agree that the topic starter did not put much forethought into the topic before posting it. When I took an antropology course in college the instructor told us that men could run faster than women because a woman had wider hips in which to birth children.
During elementary school there were only four or five girls in our class and most of them made better grades than me. By the time I graduated from high school three of those five girls had to drop out of school to have babies and they never graduated from high school. (If they were so smart then why did they get knocked up?)
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Phantom_Delta,
Posts: 2642 | Location: The Volunteer State | Registered: 06-25-03
How do we define intelligent? It's all a bit subjective to a certain extent. I.Q??? That was what my articles referred to - if you mainly talking about that as a scale, it's a very narrow scale (kind of like who is better is karma sutra). In the real World (as suppose to the fake World), EQ is mostly more important (isn't that right Mr.Bush?).
Take Business for example, most executives ranks are management positions (CEO, MD, GM, etc.) - a lot of people skills. BTW, they are mostly male (for the male driven society reasons). I personally hired a lot of nerds and Ph.D. to work for me. I am neither a nerd or have Ph.D. but I don't consider myself someone with less intelligent (or money).
quote:
When I took an antropology course in college the instructor told us that men could run faster than women because a woman had wider hips in which to birth children.
If that were the case, it should help women in many other sports that lower central gravity is an advantage. Instead men dominate most sports because we have more muscles mass (generally speaking). While women are (generally speaking) more flexible and dominate many sports with flexibility.
quote:
By the time I graduated from high school three of those five girls had to drop out of school to have babies and they never graduated from high school. (If they were so smart then why did they get knocked up?)
This is just for fun, I know. But may be they like sex - a lot of it. May be they are so smart that they feel like passing on their genes. Who knows ... may be you knocked them up to get rid of the competitions
Always my method in life, can't beat them .... screw them.
"Nunc Scio Quit Sit Amor" But it's still not premarital sex if you don't plan on getting married
"This is just for fun, I know. But may be they like sex - a lot of it. May be they are so smart that they feel like passing on their genes. Who knows ... may be you knocked them up to get rid of the competitions."
I have never knocked-up anyone. I attended planned parenthood classes in college so that I would not be knocking up anyone or getting into a unplanned pregnancy. The planned parenthood counselor told me that having a child would cost me over $250,000 in my lifetime but that was not true. (They were just trying to scare me into not knocking anyone up.) Shall we contiune this debate with quotations?
Women are wiser than men because they know less but understand more. --James Stevens, The Crock of Gold ----------- Ten measures of speech descended on the world: women took nine and men none. ---Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushim ----------- For the female of the species is more deadly than the male, --Kipling, The Female of the Species ----------- The Eternal Feminine draws us upward. --Goeth, Faust II -----------
Luck is a Lady with long gold hair. --Phantom Delta
Posts: 2642 | Location: The Volunteer State | Registered: 06-25-03
*~Come play with my children feel the peace and Scatter some joy.~* ~*Blowing out someone else's candle doesn't make your's burn any brighter.*~ We can't all be stars, but we can all twinkle. We may not have it all together, but together we have it all.
Posts: 5819 | Location: India | Registered: 07-03-01
Well girls are better at some things than us, such as yapping :P ( just joking ^^)
I think we are all good, but like there are things that we have been taught to think and girls are known to be able to do repetitive stuff well... While usually boys get bored of repetitive things pretty easily and they like to invent new things usually as they get bored with old stuff...
Also girls are looking pretty and nice so that is their physical advantage compared to men being stronger... So we all have cons and pro's...
Some people fight for equality and i think its ok to be equal just some feminist can annoy me as they say they want to switch with men for the men to do all the cleaning and stuff but they don't want to repair cars, lift things, repair the roof or some job like that :P
I mean i think equality is good but then we should be equal at everything i guess so that sides should not be exploited :P
As for me i do not mind doing everything but i dont like when someone is complaining about inequality when they are not ready to be equal and just want the benefits without taking the responsibilities hehe
Anyways i clean things myself and do all the stuff myself and i don't mind doing everything by myself but when someone publicly wants something like this then it just annoys me to see if someone wants the benefits without the disadvantages that come with it as it is not equality :P
Sorry all for the long post and have a nice day...
Go both girls and boys!! We are all good and can be good at the things that we do
I think that girls must do better in A levels than boys because A levels are only taken by girls. I draw this conclusion based on the photographs selected by newspaper editors to illustrate their stories on the subject. If you look at the websites of The Times, The Telegraph, The Guardian, The Independent, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express, The Evening Standard and The Yorkshire Post you will see that -- astonishingly -- *all* of them have led with photos of pretty girls hugging each other.
Regards
Rocky150
Posts: 4 | Location: new york | Registered: 09-05-09
No wonder they thought the boys were better than the girls.