The most logical post ITT.

Sorry i used the wrong words. waht i meant was to believe that it measures intelligence.
You can train for these tests, score higher than before your training or than other people, does that make you smarter? just my opinion that solving puzzles and math doesnt capture ones intelligence
If you honestly believe woman are biologically stupider, lol, i dont have the mental capacity to convince someone who is that blind. men training for iq tests their early life in school because they persue a career as something that has something to do with maths and puzzles is one of other reasons why women score worse. You get wisdom everyday, and if everyday means for woman to "let men do the work" and all that stuff that is supposed to be kind, they will get stupider, not they are not born with it.
Do you want to play stupid? If you only said "women are worse than men" i wouldnt argue against you. You can throw that around all you want, i dont even argue against that.

I meant they understand and express emotions better than men do. Do you wanna argue against that too? I thought that was the common opinion. I feel like few women are as cold and calculating as men

Gossiping

On the physical side, it isn't even close - men have far superior strength, coordination, agility, power etc. - even on the averages.

For the rest, you really have to understand statistical distributions and averages correctly. Men tend to be the outliers (on either end) on almost any trait, whereas averages can shift to equal (IQ), or in the favor of women (nurturing, social intelligence etc.).

Men tend to populate statistical edges since there's greater genetic variation within the sex, most likely for mate selection reasons (accelerated natural selection in the species). Women are the selectors, so they stick closer to the averages.

I believe women are biologically less intelligent than men because that's what all the evidence suggests. You believe men are physically superior to women. Why do you believe that? Is it because of the physical evidence? The fact that men have more muscle mass that we can measure? The fact men have more testosterone that we can measure? Or is it because of the results men achieve? The fact that men dominant every sport, that women have to have separate leagues because they can not compete with men?

Well both this kind of evidence exists with IQ as well, the physical and results. The physical evidence is the brain mass. Men have large brains that we can measure. At biopsy men have more neurons. Men have larger prefrontal cortex in terms of mass. Even a man and women the same weight, the man will have a larger brain on average. That is the physical evidence. Now when we look at the results men achieve we see a similar domination in mental task as we see in physical task. Men dominant mental intense competitions, such as Chess. Men dominant nobel prize winnings. Men dominante all areas that require high brain function. And based on the the physical evidence of a man (larger brain size, more neurons, ect) we would expect them to have higher IQ and achieve more mentally rigorous challenges. And when we observe reality that's exactly what we see, men achieving more. When we test mens IQ, we find them scoring higher on IQ tests.

So the question remains. Why do you accept that men are superior to women physically based off observable reality and the evidence before you, and yet you reject the empirical evidence and observational reality suggesting the same thing when it comes to intelligence? Is it because it is socially accepted that men are physically stronger, but it's not socially accepted to say men are smarter?I don't like to argue about subjective terms. Emotions are subjective. Things like physical strength is objective, we can measure physical strength. IQ is somewhat more subjective than physical strength, but it is still measurable with IQ tests. Yes, I agree women are more emotional, but in my opinion that is not a good thing. Especially when it comes to innovating, achieving, succeeding, ect; being overly emotional is just a liability.This is a common misconception, because what you are saying is true of some tests that some people use to infer IQ, tests such as the GRE, ACT, or SAT. One CAN study for these tests and improve their scores.

IQ tests used in studies test fluid IQ. These are unbiased tests that one can not study for. No amount of knowledge will increase your score on these kind of tests. The Ravens Progressive Matrices is one of these IQ tests used. It tests your raw intelligence. Your innate potential. There are no words or numbers in this test. It tests your ability to recognize patterns.

Women are much better at compassion and caring. Many more women than men can clean up a crap covered patient, suck vomit and phlegm from a mouth, clean a urine soaked wound. Women have a higher tolerance for nasty things

Sounds good if you think about it, but it doesnt convert into reality. neanderthals had bigger brains than modern humans tooLess to none women get told by their parents to persue a career like scientists or a hobby like chess. obviously men are better, they are training more.
You are giving emotional a bad image. I said they understand and express emotions better, and thats a good thing.

Sounds like something the publisher of this test would say to make people interested. if such a thing existed, why wouldnt it be used everyday? and lol at the use of the world potential, intelligence isnt a static thing, branded into you on birth

True, they did by raw mass. But it is impossible to measure how many neurons they had or spindle cells, as none exist, we can only measure their cranial capacity. Whales have bigger brains than humans, elephants have bigger brains than humans. The structure of the brain is just as important as the size. Specifically the number of neurons, spindle cells, and size of the prefrontal cortex.IQ is as static of a thing as Height. If you neglect a child it can stunt their height, but giving them extra nutrients wont make then grow taller than their genetic potential. Same with intelligence. No amount of education will increase someone's IQ on a Raven's Progressive Matrices. If you take the test at age 25 your score will likely be the same at age 40 regardless of the education you take in between that time. Education increases your knowledge in a field, not your raw intelligence. It's the reason we can't simply educate a chimpanzee to have a higher IQ, their genetics determine their IQ, like with all animals. It's the reason someone that scores low on an IQ test can't become a doctor, they don't have the IQ. Doctors have a high IQ because it takes a high IQ to become a doctor, not because the education they received gave them the high IQ.Wrong. There are so many grants and resources going into getting women into STEM fields. There is no barrier to entry other than their own brains. Training is not what makes men better than women at Chess, their innately superior IQ makes them better at Chess.

I think you would be banging at parties if you explain people why women are scientifically stupider than mena cimpanzee who does iq tests everyday will have better results than a free living one. same as hoomans

What does this have to do with anything? Yes, at parties you would be shamed because it is socially taboo. This statement tells me the obvious, that you know men are more intelligent, deep down you know. But you won't dare speak the truth because it goes against what you know to be considered the social norm. That's the difference between you and I. I value the truth, and you are an ideologue who won't dare step outside the tenants of the mainstream ideology. When presented with empirical evidence that counters your ideology you double down, and use shaming tactics such as this.No. There is no evidence to support your feelings. Taking an IQ test multiple times does not increase your score, unless it was an identical test and the test taker merely memorized the answers. Not in a chimpanzee, and not in a 'hooman'

Didnt want to shame you. I was just joking, because your writing is making me laugh. sorry
if people disagree with you bc its the social norm to do so, you need better, mroe honest people to hang around. if you meet a smart girl, i dare you to look her into her eyes and say "i dont wanna insult you but i think your gender is inferior in every way". You will never do, not because you are too shy, but because you know its not true and its only funny to say this in absence of women while talking with other man. I am sure you are wishing right now that a good girl reads this, it breaks her heart and she will desperately reach out to you and try to change your mind into something less misogynic.
Using iq tests as a training for other iq tests work, even if they are different. I dont know, just google about brain training i guess? I fail to understand how you dont know about this

Actually my GF is intelligent, higher than average. She is a CPA. I've told her all of this before to her face. I'm not afraid of saying something I know is true based on observable reality and empirical data. I value truth over feelings. You're laughing at the way I write? I'm laughing at yours, not only because it's barley coherent, but because it's painfully obvious that you are saying the exact emotional, illogical, talking points indoctrinated into the mainstream. When presented with empirical evidence that counters your ideology you simply ignore it. I see your location says Germany, all makes sense now. Sad. Your country is cucked. I know if you wrote anything that counters Merkel's opinion you could be arrested, so guess I can't blame you. Enjoy your sharia law.

I will praise allah if my people never turn into delusional, misogynic idiots

Long distance swimming is the only thing I know where they beat men consistently

As I’m sure you know, in terms of IQ there tends to be a wider variance in IQ with men the women. Most women cluster around average, while there are significantly more geniuses and idiots among men. Despite women clustering around average there are women geniuses and morons.

The girl you are arguing with clearly falls into the latter category. And when there is a 2 SD gap communication can become difficult and almost impossible when talking with someone with a really low IQ.

You’re wasting your time, bro.

One thing that comes to mind is the top of your head against the wall, three steps back, holding up a chair, then stand straight up thing.

Men can't do it, women can.

Something about them having a bigger ass or something.

Would post a link, but can't.

Reading social cues and caring for younger children.

I would say they make better kindergarten teachers.

Strong understanding of cultural mores pre 1960 or so.Isn't that a center of gravity thing? Probably related to men more easily hitting higher numbers on bench press.

And I'm amused about the "larger brain" theory. Wear a size large hat I do.

giving birth

Creating drama

Elementary/primary school teacher, nurse, nanny, care givers,

I wanna say fashion/makeup, but gay men seems to be doing better than women there

Multitasking
Executive assistants
Project managers
Marketing, advertising, creative careers
Communicating with others in the workforce
Listening
College graduates
English, history, those type of courses
Living longer

and the obvious ones giving birth, nursing, teaching, nurturing, etc.

Accepting abuse
Accepting 2 place status
Following the rules
Raising children single handedly
Following restrictive social norms that dictate how they mate, behave and appear

im quoting this because its the most accessible one in here. i dont believe men are more intelligent.

i think its shifted at some point. men are more physical definitely..

but they get you to do a whole lot for poosy. i mean, literally sitting there doing nothing will not get poosy. so, its a matter of doing X to get there

it's definitely a woman's world right now and will continue to grow that way for the forseeable future. all they have to do is say "no" and you go on your jolly way because you don't meet their requirements. once you meet their requirements it's "yes"

you also said iq tests are "objective" but there is someone or a team of some people stating that that question is the right one to ask. it's definitely not "objective" really

but i do agree it measures something. im also not so sure it means someone is unable to learn it, just that they don't know it at that point in time

- lying to themselves
- lying to others
- creating entire fantasy worlds in order to normalise their actions because "that's not the kind of person they are"
- playing victim
- manipulation

I tend to look at the genetic variations between sexes. But just looking at Male and female sexlinked characteristics doesnt really give you a clear picture of who is better at what activities.
You get into the argument about nature vs nurture. Also, if anyone takes into account the genetic variation of Gene's that make someone's genotype different than their phenotype? For example xxy of xyy, mutations of hormone binders, or different sex linked mutations. We could be classifying and lumping the wrong sexes into the wrong categories if you just simply see it at man and women.
Instead of seeing each person individually we try and compare our two sexes and pit them against one another. It's a joke. Competition is such an amazing thing and so important for us to grow and survive....but not when it's taken to a negative extream.
If all you see a women is good at is child bearing than maybe you, yourself are less educated than you think.

They on average make better nurses and carers. They are by nature better nurturers than men. Men tend to lack empathy for those roles. Of course many women use that empathy they have for nefarious reasons to trap men for instance, but it can be used for good as well. I think men's main weakness is they can be a bit too pigheaded at times and are less able to put themselves in another persons shoes. Women can do that and it can have all sorts of advantages. Our testosterone levels, can also be a weakness. Women can be better manipulators ,particularly of men. They can be better at calming down highly disturbed people, whereas men will almost always have to resort to force . In fact the rare man with a female like empathy for others could well end up in a very powerful position in life. As to understand people can also be used to gain further power.

Women can make excellent spies, they were used quite a bit during ww2, and I suspect are used to this day for that role.

IQ tests are the best measure we have cross-culturally of someone's "processing power"; it is a pretty good indicator of overall intelligence and real world success (when coupled with conscientiousness).

The thing I don't get with IQ tests is why they ignore "social intelligence", or the ability to read other people. It's definitely a form of intelligence and can put people ahead in life, especially in sales and people-focused roles. I suppose processing power is just a more powerful indicator of success as it's more encompassing.

Interesting indeed.

You are mind blowingly retarded. Reading your posts is like going to the zoo, the content of which is so ignorant of science I cannot actually bring myself to discuss them. Congratulations, you have actually stunned me into silence.