"While the male and female average IQs are roughly the same, men are more likely to be very smart or very dull than women are, whereas women cluster more closely around the average. Back when college was very rare and limited to the best and brightest, men predominated in the population that was smart enough; now that more than 50 percent of high-school grads go to college, that factor is dead — and from this alone we should actually expect more women than men to be in college. (When college enrollment pushes further into the population, it's mainly picking up people with IQs around average, which are mostly women.)"
Read the entire article here: http://phibetacons.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Zjc5MjFhYzU4MTQ1NWFlOTk4YjZiMzE2MDhjNjIxMDY=
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
18 comments:
I probably have a genius IQ ... it just hasn't been discovered yet.
On topic - the Daily Mail are reporting on a false rape case. Good to see them back dealing with such issues as they'd very much gone off the boil over the last few months and pretty much ignored an issue they covered quite well in the past:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1224454/Woman-cried-rape-sex-man-met-online-jailed-months.html
I read it, anon. Here's an excerpt:
"She was ashamed and embarrassed by the way she met this man, and feared the police would not believe her or take her seriously if she told the truth about that."
So, did she lie about the actual "rape", or did she lie about how she met him?
One rather good comment in that Daily Mail article. It descibes her as a "Reverse rapist". An excellent term, perhaps we should use it more here?
What do others think?
I think the article takes the problem of men falling behind far too lightly. Public schools are failing boys miserably. There aren't enough male role-models because males know that it isn't safe to work in public schools -- the risk of a false accusation is too great; and besides, who wants to work in a female-dominated environment?
No, this is wrong. One would have to go pretty far back to find when going to college was 'rare'. Even when it was quite common in the 70's and 80's, men exceeded women.
This is really just an attempt to justify the enrollment imbalance.
To continue my comment...
Spinning recent research results like this is quite insidious, and it is beginning to become commonplace. The feminists and their sympathisers know they cannot outright deny these results, since scientific (evolutionary, biological) methods of psychology have been used to obtain them; therefore, they are figuring out ways to put a 'justification/anti-male/pro-female' slant on things.
It is even fooling a significant number of MRAs:)
Okay, I researched the issue, and as I suspected, admissions standards have been rising. According to "Trends in College Admission 2000":
"The data analyzed in this report confirm what we have known for years - that college admission decisions are made in an increasingly competitive landscape..."
"selectivity at 4-year colleges has increased."
http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:ZhOVqy2PPTcJ:www.airweb.org/images/trendssummary.pdf+Trends+in+College+Admission+2000:+A+Report+of+a+National+Survey+of+Undergraduate+Admission+Policies,+Practices+and+Procedures.&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESirfGTXbhPD8_FJhhOhf9DtEa1CxCKTwb9ZMoHOaOlnwePx8-_Poh3l5urgOsyfshaF3bcJBO9ZnTKp-drqJFL-BziQaxwU_xcfIWoLE4Wn75PwDXXnRD-RxDxdjUhcudUWSe7T&sig=AFQjCNHrqNc34dh_Rv-yBjFde86YYs2slw
And finally, Moxon shows research that the whole-range/real-smart/dumbo curve for men's I.Q.'s vs. number/percentage of people is essentially a 'flattened' bell curve with slight rises at the ends. The female curve is also a bell but is not nearly as flat. So it is true that percentage of women exceeds men in the middle of the range, but since the curves are essentially bell's, then the greater admission rate of men (partly due to increased standards) at the somewhat-higher to extreme high I.Q.'s should compensate.
At least, it seems to me this should be true - but I'm not sure if this is to be based on 'area under the curve' - perhaps someone who knows more about statistics could explain.
My son has a female friend with a hispanic surname - she is 98% Italian, but the name is what matters - she gets offers in the mail all the time for free or reduced tuition. There are 'programs' for unwed mothers, ladies of color, student loans so on and so on....
My son is working his way through, and is pretty bitter about the struggle he has before him...but like they say -- you can't keep a good man down.
I have seen all sorts of studies on the IQ differential and profess no expertise. I know that when a major piece was done on it last year, the feminists screamed bloody murder -- the artificial patriarchy construct is responsible for so many high IQ males -- so I strongly suspect they would completely disagree with the premise of this author's statement. It is for that reason I think he's on to something.
But for the vast majority of men and women the differences are negligible. They explain why a tiny number of men are geniuses but not why such a large number of men have fallen behind in education.
I don't think there's any way one could argue against this point. If men's abilities are spread across a wider range than women's, then how could colleges avoid not selecting greater numbers of women? As college educations become available for more and more people, the group for which it remains unavailable is that of those with low IQs, and the smaller this group gets, the more it will be predominantly men.
The material question is how significant this is. I suspect it would have to take its place amongst so many other reasons proposed.
Another reason I don't hear much is that of the nature of education. I've almost completed a degree, one I started in a subject for which I had a great deal of amateur enthusiasm. The college treatment of it has completely killed that off - it is now only a grind. The intellectual challenge has been nothing compared to the challenge of staying awake. I look at my degree not as a monument to learning and intellectual achievement, but as a credential to my endurance of boredom. I remember reading years ago that various space agencies considered women as better candidates as astronauts because of their 'greater tolerance of boredom'. Different era though.
Yet another reason is the enormous opportunity cost of a degree. Losing 4 years of employment and work experience in pursuit of a credential that signifies little is hardly indicative of the ideal employee. Especially if the degree was in Economics, Accountancy or Commerce. Such people are expected to know about return on investment, maximizing yield and cutting of unnecessary costs - all things that the young and enterprising can engage in without wasting their youths in extended schooling.
Yet another reason is that men don't go to college in order to seek out a marriage partner.
I think one innacuracy being introduced is they're not looking at just 4-year colleges, leave alone reputable colleges.
They aren't picking a marriage partner because no man in his right mind would get married these days. Family court is a slaughterhouse for men.
Some men cannot afford to go to college. Some of them are too busy financially supporting wives or girlfriends who are going to college.
Amazing as always
Sorry to be off topic but where can I find best resource on car insjury atotrney?
Post a Comment