Great selectively choosing to use intellect as a point though, yes there's a higher chance of mega IQ men. But there's also a higher chance of sub 75iq men too..
Yes men have invented most things, but that's usually because men are more logical and have more resolve. Which is also why men dominate eSports.
It's tiring reading crap like this, humanity is a partnership. Yes women have 'inferior' traits but amazingly men do too.
The dude who wrote that is probably some incel still living with his parents.
Yes women have 'inferior' traits but amazingly men do too.
My knee-jerk reaction to OP was much the same as yours, but this specific claim got me thinking: exactly what superior traits do women possess?
Emotional IQ? But the greatest poets, musicians, and artists in history are men.
Social aptitude? But the greatest leaders and organisers in history are men.
Cooking? The greatest chefs are men.
Fashion? The greatest designers are (gay) men.
Child rearing? Single mother households are a plague on society.
Peaceful rule? The greatest pacifist activists in history are men.
Seems to me that every space dominated by women has been defaulted to them. When men choose to participate in those spaces, men quickly dominate.
The two things women do better:
Birth children
Use their sexuality to manipulate men
These also happen to be the only two things (I can think of) that men literally cannot do.
I believe that birthing children is so obviously important that it equals (and perhaps even trumps) everything men can do. But when I really sit and think about it, that's the long and short of what "women are best at".
Women are better at putting up with shit and just working. It's really amazing how badly women can be treated and they just keep plugging along.
Look at the middle east. And women defend their servitude. Look at societies throughout history where men would rebel and fight and die, women just tolerate whatever shitty conditions and keep working.
They are really good at just accepting their lot in life and plugging along.
Well, Women live longer, even if adjust for less risk taking. They are less susceptible to a number of diseases. It possibly has something to do with the importance of grandmothering (it’s much easier to handle children if grandma is still around)
You are completely blinded by your male perspective on this one, and you're also forgetting that men occupy both ends of the bell curve.
One very important thing you have to understand is men are always about "works" because those works are status signifies... to women. It's part of male psychology. Successful males will always generate a status signal.
Where you're wrong:
Emotional IQ: But the greatest poets, musicians, and artists in history are men.
Those have nothing to do with one another. EQ is about managing social-emotional networks by understanding the psychological perceptions of all participants, and fostering an emotionally positive environment by doing so. Women are better than men at it.
Social aptitude? But the greatest leaders and organizers in history are men.
This is a huge one you're misunderstanding. Social aptitude has nothing to do with organizing. The kind of leadership you're thinking of is based on Charisma... which is absolutely a male trait, but that's not what Social Aptitude is. It's about forming, navigating, cultivating, and maintaining social networks. Women are superb at this. Men rarely even recognize the need for one. It's a night and day difference. This is one of the reasons why women remember other people's anniversary dates. They are aware of the socio-emotional impact of these dates and their influence on relationships within the social network that they've woven.
Child rearing? Single mother households are a plague on society.
Single parent households are bad generally. Single mothers are just particularly bad. Single father households might bring the kid up physically to not be a criminal because they won't be fragile, low-time preference, undisciplined nonsense. Instead they will be effectively autistic and not capable of strong socialization skills. They'll get a job. But they won't raise a family, their degeneracy and social collapse will increase with time as they continue to fail to develop any kind of real social safety net.
Put it like this: do you know what happens to an infant without a mother prior to a few centuries ago? It fucking dies because it can't eat. Dad doesn't have mammary glans. Men literally aren't fit to raise infants. They are still needed to raise children into adults, but you need both parents to raise a kid.
Now, here's where you are just missing the point:
Cooking? The greatest chefs are men.
You're misunderstanding the role. Men shouldn't be cooking in the family. The most successful anything are men because of their performance in the bell-curve. Chefs provide income for their families, and the food is a status symbol of their competency. That's the point.
Women are supposed to be cooking so that they can prepare men to use all available nutrients and caloric intake to get the things that the woman needs to continue building the family and community at home. Women help men manage energy supplies through cooking. Cooking also helps feed the children because it gives them vital food that their digestive system might not be able to process yet.
Peaceful rule? The greatest pacifist activists in history are men.
This is just a feminist trope. Women will murder the shit out of each other.
Fashion? The greatest designers are (gay) men.
Again, you're looking at a form a status signaling. The primary purpose of fashion is to convey the value of women to men in a way that men can easily decipher.
I think you're confusing "women often do this thing" with "women are better at this thing". Women seem to be very good at things that men either don't value or don't prioritize. This is not the same thing as superiority in those tasks.
I think you're still missing the point about what women are and how they fit into relationships with men. Men are always going to be at the ends of the bell curve for both absolute best and worst. Women become a kind of moderating force for men. Women do not have to be the best in all of society, that is a strive for status that men have to get women. Women simply have to be the animus of their particular man. They need to complement and supplement what he is capable of.
Your paper claims 4 points, not 5 points, and what it actually purports to demonstrate is 1.8 points. But is this actually replicated?
I don't know where you got the bell curve from. As far as I know, that goes against the consensus of intelligence researchers (which is pretty based, acknowledging things like racial differences).
Men dominate esports because the reaction time of men is on average higher than women as well as having a higher standard deviation. It's the same reason men dominate motorsports.
Just reads like some women hating crap tbh.
Great selectively choosing to use intellect as a point though, yes there's a higher chance of mega IQ men. But there's also a higher chance of sub 75iq men too..
Yes men have invented most things, but that's usually because men are more logical and have more resolve. Which is also why men dominate eSports.
It's tiring reading crap like this, humanity is a partnership. Yes women have 'inferior' traits but amazingly men do too.
The dude who wrote that is probably some incel still living with his parents.
My knee-jerk reaction to OP was much the same as yours, but this specific claim got me thinking: exactly what superior traits do women possess?
Emotional IQ? But the greatest poets, musicians, and artists in history are men.
Social aptitude? But the greatest leaders and organisers in history are men.
Cooking? The greatest chefs are men.
Fashion? The greatest designers are (gay) men.
Child rearing? Single mother households are a plague on society.
Peaceful rule? The greatest pacifist activists in history are men.
Seems to me that every space dominated by women has been defaulted to them. When men choose to participate in those spaces, men quickly dominate.
The two things women do better:
Birth children
Use their sexuality to manipulate men
These also happen to be the only two things (I can think of) that men literally cannot do.
I believe that birthing children is so obviously important that it equals (and perhaps even trumps) everything men can do. But when I really sit and think about it, that's the long and short of what "women are best at".
You forgot treachery. Nobody's better at backstabbing.
I thought men committed more adultery.
Men admit to it more.
With that said, there isn't enough data on single father households, since judges overwhelmingly award children to the mothers.
Women are better at putting up with shit and just working. It's really amazing how badly women can be treated and they just keep plugging along.
Look at the middle east. And women defend their servitude. Look at societies throughout history where men would rebel and fight and die, women just tolerate whatever shitty conditions and keep working.
They are really good at just accepting their lot in life and plugging along.
Well, Women live longer, even if adjust for less risk taking. They are less susceptible to a number of diseases. It possibly has something to do with the importance of grandmothering (it’s much easier to handle children if grandma is still around)
That's an interesting one.
You are completely blinded by your male perspective on this one, and you're also forgetting that men occupy both ends of the bell curve.
One very important thing you have to understand is men are always about "works" because those works are status signifies... to women. It's part of male psychology. Successful males will always generate a status signal.
Where you're wrong:
Those have nothing to do with one another. EQ is about managing social-emotional networks by understanding the psychological perceptions of all participants, and fostering an emotionally positive environment by doing so. Women are better than men at it.
This is a huge one you're misunderstanding. Social aptitude has nothing to do with organizing. The kind of leadership you're thinking of is based on Charisma... which is absolutely a male trait, but that's not what Social Aptitude is. It's about forming, navigating, cultivating, and maintaining social networks. Women are superb at this. Men rarely even recognize the need for one. It's a night and day difference. This is one of the reasons why women remember other people's anniversary dates. They are aware of the socio-emotional impact of these dates and their influence on relationships within the social network that they've woven.
Single parent households are bad generally. Single mothers are just particularly bad. Single father households might bring the kid up physically to not be a criminal because they won't be fragile, low-time preference, undisciplined nonsense. Instead they will be effectively autistic and not capable of strong socialization skills. They'll get a job. But they won't raise a family, their degeneracy and social collapse will increase with time as they continue to fail to develop any kind of real social safety net.
Put it like this: do you know what happens to an infant without a mother prior to a few centuries ago? It fucking dies because it can't eat. Dad doesn't have mammary glans. Men literally aren't fit to raise infants. They are still needed to raise children into adults, but you need both parents to raise a kid.
Now, here's where you are just missing the point:
You're misunderstanding the role. Men shouldn't be cooking in the family. The most successful anything are men because of their performance in the bell-curve. Chefs provide income for their families, and the food is a status symbol of their competency. That's the point.
Women are supposed to be cooking so that they can prepare men to use all available nutrients and caloric intake to get the things that the woman needs to continue building the family and community at home. Women help men manage energy supplies through cooking. Cooking also helps feed the children because it gives them vital food that their digestive system might not be able to process yet.
This is just a feminist trope. Women will murder the shit out of each other.
Again, you're looking at a form a status signaling. The primary purpose of fashion is to convey the value of women to men in a way that men can easily decipher.
I think you're confusing "women often do this thing" with "women are better at this thing". Women seem to be very good at things that men either don't value or don't prioritize. This is not the same thing as superiority in those tasks.
I think you're still missing the point about what women are and how they fit into relationships with men. Men are always going to be at the ends of the bell curve for both absolute best and worst. Women become a kind of moderating force for men. Women do not have to be the best in all of society, that is a strive for status that men have to get women. Women simply have to be the animus of their particular man. They need to complement and supplement what he is capable of.
Your paper claims 4 points, not 5 points, and what it actually purports to demonstrate is 1.8 points. But is this actually replicated?
I don't know where you got the bell curve from. As far as I know, that goes against the consensus of intelligence researchers (which is pretty based, acknowledging things like racial differences).
Yes, which is what this paper is about.
That's why there are fewer, because of greater concentration for females around the average, and a more extreme distribution for men.
Actually the IQ thing was proven false, men have more geniuses but higher median and average IQ by a few points.
This shit is just the mirror image of feminism.
Is that what you got from my statement?
You're even able to twist reality like they can, congratulations.
Huh, I thought he was agreeing with you. But looks like he amended the quote a bit.
Men dominate esports because the reaction time of men is on average higher than women as well as having a higher standard deviation. It's the same reason men dominate motorsports.