The Science Of Why Woman Out Perform Men
The Science of Why Women Out Perform Men. Without going to the Darwinian psychology, I will explain it. I wonder how long it would take before a commonal garden NT to work it out.
In the example, I use the term geek referring to the 30% most geek of the general male population, including those with Asperger syndrome.
The reason why women are excelling at university is actually because men are becoming less intelligent/intellectual. This phenomenon is down to the fact women are less attracted to the intellectual geek type and more attracted to the playboy womanising, bad boy type. Then they have children with those types long before most geeks get to prove themselves and get highly paying jobs.
It stands to reason, that if a woman consistently have children with bad boys, then more or less expect the male offspring to inherit the same characteristics as their father, and any female offspring would inherit the taste for bad boys.
Many geeks by the time they get these high paying jobs, and not all of them do, many women have reduced fatality by then, in comparison to their younger years resulting in fewer geek offspring, while bad-boys get a extra early start with teenage pregnancies and they don’t exactly stick to one woman either.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8085011.stm
Up until now, if a nation stated to suffer from this problem, then a stronger nation that is more technically advanced or ones that isn’t comprised broken families would obliterate them.
If everyone in modern Britain was taken back to fight the WWII there would be many factors that would have lost the war.
1) The lack of scientists to invent better weapons
2) The Beta man, who will never have a chance to start a family, has no stake in the success of the war either desert, or try to improve his status to acquire a woman by stealing resources should be reserved for the war.
3) The high ratio of woman to men would mean woman would have to take up arms, they can’t compete very well against the perfect arion soldiers, full of testosterone.
The bad boy type might put a put a good fight at wartime but he would be outnumbered
http://www.suurland-media.com/blueprint ... mks-ix.gif
In the example, I use the term geek referring to the 30% most geek of the general male population, including those with Asperger syndrome.
The reason why women are excelling at university is actually because men are becoming less intelligent/intellectual. This phenomenon is down to the fact women are less attracted to the intellectual geek type and more attracted to the playboy womanising, bad boy type. Then they have children with those types long before most geeks get to prove themselves and get highly paying jobs.
It stands to reason, that if a woman consistently have children with bad boys, then more or less expect the male offspring to inherit the same characteristics as their father, and any female offspring would inherit the taste for bad boys.
Many geeks by the time they get these high paying jobs, and not all of them do, many women have reduced fatality by then, in comparison to their younger years resulting in fewer geek offspring, while bad-boys get a extra early start with teenage pregnancies and they don’t exactly stick to one woman either.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8085011.stm
It stands to speculative reason. It doesn't stand to science.
For that theory to work something would have needed to change fairly recently in human history, women previously being attracted to more intelligent men, followed by a shift towards the opposite, which in today's current state of affairs makes no sense, both from a evolutionary view and that of Darwinian psychology. More intelligent men are better off, and so better providers than ever before.
Factors entirely seperate from sexual selection could be responsible, changing social attitudes, neofeminism, consumerism, for example.
In the past, not so long ago at least 1948 before the NHS and before Social Security and any state benefit, a woman which children was almost dependent on a man. Her children almost certainly would die before reaching adulthood otherwise.
In those time the survival of the child reaching adulthood would depend a loyal, intelligent man to support he financially and to offer the many numerous services that are now available free on the state.
In modern times, a child’s survival to adulthood is not dependent on loyalty, financial support, or intellectual intelligent from a man as it is now taken care of by the state. As a result men are de-evolving those abilities and bad boy womanising types are filling the gap.
If woman solely chose a man for his intelligence and money making ability by the laws of natural selection men should evolve more intelligent relative to woman instead of the other way around. And men would not develop this anti-intellectual attitude so common in Chavs, Yordies, Jocks, RudeBoys and Scousers( to a limited extent).
I had to rush this article as I have to get back to work, so you later.
In the example, I use the term geek referring to the 30% most geek of the general male population, including those with Asperger syndrome.
The reason why women are excelling at university is actually because men are becoming less intelligent/intellectual. This phenomenon is down to the fact women are less attracted to the intellectual geek type and more attracted to the playboy womanising, bad boy type. Then they have children with those types long before most geeks get to prove themselves and get highly paying jobs.
It stands to reason, that if a woman consistently have children with bad boys, then more or less expect the male offspring to inherit the same characteristics as their father, and any female offspring would inherit the taste for bad boys.
Many geeks by the time they get these high paying jobs, and not all of them do, many women have reduced fatality by then, in comparison to their younger years resulting in fewer geek offspring, while bad-boys get a extra early start with teenage pregnancies and they don’t exactly stick to one woman either.
It's because we have more testosterone, the brain develops differently in the presence of testosterone. Male brains are highly lateralised, whereas female brains are more balanced out. The school system is set-up in a way that benefits left-brained and well-rounded individuals. In computer-game terms, you could say that the male brain has been min-maxed.
Intelligence follows the normal distribution, if you were to plot male and female intelligence they'd average out at the same point, but the male graph would have more range.
The system more or less always been this way. If it was the case it was purely down to the exams, man who are extremely NT would do very well in class because their brains are much more similar to a woman then an aspies. But this isn't the case, they are joining the male anti-intellectual culture and woman outnumber them in the evening schools. I once started a basic car maintenance course there was only 3 other men compared to over 7 woman. Once ability to pass exams doesn't effect ones willingness to learn.
When I went to Birkbeck University as a part time student, one thing I was very surprised with is the lack of working class British there. It was comprised mostly of immigrants and middle-class English. There was no one with a common accent, no cockney or no chavs that sound like Dizzee Rascal when he is singing. But I was their despite the education system being heavily oriented towards female NTs.
Incorrect, an NT male's brain is highly lateralised and is not similar to a female brain in this regard. Male brains and aspie brains don't have much in common.
Girls outperform guys all over the world and average intelligence is also consistant all over the world despite the fact that there are many cultures. If you're idea were correct, this wouldn't be the case.
2. Men’s IQ has greater variance, which means that there are more men than women in the very high and very low IQ groups.
Quoted from a website, although it's pretty much common knowledge anyway. School and exams are more verbal/language based than they are visually based. Exams aren't open ended and do not factor in or encourage novel thinking or use of base ability, they encourage parrot fashioned learning, which a female is better at. When you are taught things in class, the majority of the time it will be in written form. In university, people sit down through lectures listen to someone explain with words how things work. There maybe the odd picture to give a rough idea, but the vast majority of the data is explained with words. This favours the female population.
Actually,-since-the-introduction-of-intelligence-testing-Western-populations-have-consistently-increased-in-intelligence-measures-from-generation-to-generation.
After-all,-since-when-were-brainy-but-geeky-girls-the-first-choice-of-brawny-but-stupid-badboys?--If-female-selection-for-things-rather-than-intelligence-where-making-males-more-stupid-it-would-be-doing-exactly-the-same-to-females.
After-all,-since-when-were-brainy-but-geeky-girls-the-first-choice-of-brawny-but-stupid-badboys?--If-female-selection-for-things-rather-than-intelligence-where-making-males-more-stupid-it-would-be-doing-exactly-the-same-to-females.
Right, but there have been scattered studies over the past several decades indicating that IQ tends to correlate with lower fertility rates; although the phenotypic IQ has in the past displayed such an increasing trend, the genotypic IQ may not. However, at least one study, I am given to believe, has found that higher female IQ has a greater impact on family size than higher male IQ.
_________________
* here for the nachos.
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Best Science Fiction Movies? |
05 Jan 2024, 8:01 pm |
Intelligent design has no place in science classrooms. |
17 Mar 2024, 8:20 pm |
Why shame a woman for having a child later ? |
31 Dec 2023, 8:28 pm |
woman tried to buy stuff at Walmart with a million dollar bi |
20 Jan 2024, 1:52 pm |