Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

If men were wiped out post-1800s, where would women be now? Watch

    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)
    Actually, I think you'll find you can. Practicing such tests trains your mind to deal with such problems. If you practice a crapload of stuff on spatial reasoning, your ability in the area is bound to improve.
    Yes, but revision wouldn't pay off as much as for Uni exams.

    But surely women are more likely to revise for stuff (generalisation I know), so if revision was so helpful, should women not do better in IQ tests?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Chocolate chip cookies were invented by a woman. If you have chocolate chip cookies, you don't need anything else
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)
    Yeah, I saw you say that earlier. I'm saying it will take decades to catch up. When men have been above women for centuries, what makes you think it's possible to reach such a level in decades when men have been working on it for so much longer?

    And of course it's going to be difficult to find solid proof of employment practices as if proof was available, they'd be breaching legislation. However, if you look at comparable statistics on male/female pay for equivalent jobs, the figure is much lower. Plus, if you look at the proportion of females on boards of firms, the percentage is very small. Do you not find this a coincidence? If education performance is greater in females than in males, why is there such a small amount in the top jobs? It's nothing to do with initiative. A lot of employers assume (and sometimes, rightly) that a woman is going to bugger off and have a baby in the near future and it won't be wise to take her on. Men don't have this problem (at least not to the same extent) and are seen as a more risk-free applicant. I understand that not every woman wants a top job - some want to stay home and be housewives and whatever, but you are truly ignorant if you think the lack of women in such positions is through lack of trying.
    There is no 'catching up' to do. Men and women don't work as seperate entities. For example, I'm working on a scientific study at the minute that'll be published in a journal of neurology. Any woman could go and take that study and expand on it. I'm not going to put a big 'only for men' label on it.

    I really doubt females out do males education wise world wide consistently. Even if they do - it isn't a better measure than an IQ test for determining raw intelligence. Males are more intelligent than females - that is a scientific fact. Saying otherwise would be wrong, as this has been determined time and time again. Even if IQ tests aren't accurate, they are the most accurate tools we have at the minute to prove the hypothesis.

    Maybe females are paid less because they aren't deemed as important or useful? Maybe this isn't discrimination but actual concern?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    There is no 'catching up' to do. Men and women don't work as seperate entities. For example, I'm working on a scientific study at the minute that'll be published in a journal of neurology. Any woman could go and take that study and expand on it. I'm not going to put a big 'only for men' label on it.

    I really doubt females out do males education wise world wide consistently. Even if they do - it isn't a better measure than an IQ test for determining raw intelligence. Males are more intelligent than females - that is a scientific fact. Saying otherwise would be wrong, as this has been determined time and time again. Even if IQ tests aren't accurate, they are the most accurate tools we have at the minute to prove the hypothesis.

    Maybe females are paid less because they aren't deemed as important or useful? Maybe this isn't discrimination but actual concern?
    How is that not discrimination? If a woman is equally qualified, what is the employer basing this opinion on of whether the woman is 'useful' or not?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    Look up g loaded IQ tests or the g factor. (A technique invented by men.)
    I object to intelligence tests. Read Stephen Jay Gould.

    All tests are flawed, but often there is no alternative. We certainly shouldn't use them to determine native intelligence.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PrinceValiant)
    The fact that men have dominated the world for so long proves that they must be naturally more intelligent than women otherwise they couldn't have dominated. Surely the gender that allows itself to be dominated for so long must be the weaker in mind?

    Please don't respond with "men used their physical prowess" to dominate the world because if that were the case then black people would have dominated the world before white people.
    It is more complex than you say. It does not logically follow that because men have dominated, they must be more intelligent. Similarly, you seem to suggest that black people are physically stronger than white people. Why then, did they 'allow' themselves to become slaves? It is not simply a case of allowing oneself to be dominated; men got themselves into a position where they could subjucate the opposite sex, and established a patriachal society which perpetuated this.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reaver)
    Yeah... you completely misunderstand, good job.
    Perhaps the failure is in your ineloquence.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    There is no 'catching up' to do. Men and women don't work as seperate entities. For example, I'm working on a scientific study at the minute that'll be published in a journal of neurology. Any woman could go and take that study and expand on it. I'm not going to put a big 'only for men' label on it.

    I really doubt females out do males education wise world wide consistently. Even if they do - it isn't a better measure than an IQ test for determining raw intelligence. Males are more intelligent than females - that is a scientific fact. Saying otherwise would be wrong, as this has been determined time and time again. Even if IQ tests aren't accurate, they are the most accurate tools we have at the minute to prove the hypothesis.

    Maybe females are paid less because they aren't deemed as important or useful? Maybe this isn't discrimination but actual concern?
    Surely females are paid the same as males now in the same job?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    It is more complex than you say. It does not logically follow that because men have dominated, they must be more intelligent. Similarly, you seem to suggest that black people are physically stronger than white people. Why then, did they 'allow' themselves to become slaves? It is not simply a case of allowing oneself to be dominated; men got themselves into a position where they could subjucate the opposite sex, and established a patriachal society which perpetuated this.
    You work it out Sherlock.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonty99)
    Surely females are paid the same as males now in the same job?
    I know but Clements- says that isn't the case.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    I know but Clements- says that isn't the case.
    Hey, I'm only going on statistics. Don't shoot the ******* messenger.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PrinceValiant)
    You work it out Sherlock.
    Are you suggesting white people are more intelligent than black people?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonty99)
    Surely females are paid the same as males now in the same job?
    They aren't. Partly due to discrimination, and partly due to women working fewer hours due to things like responsibility for childcare.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    Perhaps the failure is in your ineloquence.
    It's trivial to dwell on that, really.
    No, that's not where the failure lies. You're just not willing or are unable to grasp a basic concept for what it really is.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    Are you suggesting white people are more intelligent than black people?
    It's been shown that they're more educated. But, given equal educational opportunities, I guess it's unclear what the difference would be. Intelligence can be built upon by education so if their less educated in general, I'm guessing that's what they're referring to. Either that, or they're just saying it for the sheer hell of it.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Deadly Lightshade)
    They aren't. Partly due to discrimination, and partly due to women working fewer hours due to things like responsibility for childcare.
    Why is it discrimination? Do you mean that if a woman was doing exactly the same job as the man, she'd get paid less? (Taking into account her working less hours for children etc - that's her choice)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    Are you suggesting white people are more intelligent than black people?
    Like women and men, black and white, you can't say that every member of one race/gender is smarter than every member of the other but you can generalise. And for me, generally white people are more intelligent than black people. Just as black people, in general, have greater physical attributes.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PrinceValiant)
    You work it out Sherlock.
    What point are you trying to make?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Deadly Lightshade)
    They aren't. Partly due to discrimination, and partly due to women working fewer hours due to things like responsibility for childcare.
    Wrong. If that were the case the company would get blown up in court.

    The child care could be right. But hey, if you churned out a baby and work fewer hours, you can't blame the company. You only recieve an equal amount to what you give.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PygmyShrew)
    I honestly think the world would be a better place. Maybe there wouldn't have been the same advancements in technology and engineering as it would take some time for women to catch up in that respect, but people would survive and the worst crimes (murder, rape, assault, paedophilic acts) would barely exist in comparison to now. I think women would be better at being less aggressive and more diplomatic, therefore wars would be less of a problem. War and the need for military power has driven the advancement of a lot of technology, but it is not necessary to survive adequately. I think there would be more economic equality worldwide as I believe women would be more empathic towards the problems of other countries. Things like AIDs may have never come in to existance. I think there would be much less oppression in the name of religion. Less time spent on development of military capabilities and more time spent on cures for diseases.

    I hope this doesn't offend anyone. I can't help but feel that women are generally more caring.

    However, nobody can even begin to know how women would respond if the responsibility for the world was placed on their shoulders.
    The biggest myth the world has ever created! Did you got to school ffs?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 4, 2013
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.