Men are better at Science

JennyRater:

Modeling takes talent?
In that case, so do comas.

Either way, modeling does not make one stupid. You make you stupid- all your posts, for example.

Who said it matters?

I'm pointing to the irony of a "feminist" (you) in defense of her gender actually reinforcing why it is women are pathetic.

Monkey:

Careful there, you'll get ashy knees crawling around after Jennyrater.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No fucking shit, Shysterlock! I don't care to justify early because I like to see JUST how deep the self-delusion runs throughout the masses.

Now, if you're such a great debater, can you now prove to the great unwashed here that what we know to be fact is proven as such by an unbiased survey?

No. None have been carried out. Our only evidence, one way or another, is circumstantial.

(geez, I turn my back for a few days, and this place goes to shit...)

Gwen Guthrie, you spouted some bull about Hungary. Did you forget that I was talking about women advancing in DEMOCRACIES? Not self-proclaimed socialist states moving away from totalitarianism in which unnatural quotas where strictly enforced? Like the university your relative was allowed into...speaking of which, noticed how easy it is, scholastically speaking, to enter universities these days? No wonder employers laugh at the grads coming out these days...

At the EARLIEST ages, boys sieze chances to understand how things move, feel, interoperate etc. Girls are more interested in yapping. Boys ALSO learn how to yap, but girls knowledge of spatial and mechanical operations grows at a much slower rate through childhood, and thus widens the gulf. Whether it be in Hungary, or in Harlem. I'm watching the process unfold in my own family, and despite my best attempts to encourage my niece to work out the remote, or handle a set of keys, she is simply more interested in talking and being spoken to. Whereas my 2 year old nephew has already overtaken her; example, he knows how to switch my monitor on, and she doesn't.

At ANY of the top 10 pharmaceuticals, the new grad intake will consist overwhelmingly of MEN. The fact that there are more male scientists than females, AND that those male scientists are generally more highly skilled than female ones MEANS that men are better at the 'hard' sciences than women.
This is more of the circumstantial evidence I mentioned earlier.

KS

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Science isn't just about mechanical things, shithead. It includes fields like sociology, where talking to people can uncover alot, dirty paki pigfucker. I have always said women tend to go into science less, asshole, but the ones that do go into science are good at it, you cumsucking man-whore. Your ideas about women are self-fufilling, the less you expect, the less you get back, asslicking shitgobbling glory hole queen.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Don't let your passions get in the way of your reasoning, woman.

Jaybee, your argument is entirely unscientific. You have no evidence, just a niece and a nephew. Show some studies that support the prowess of man scientists (or real numbers, not just saying a lot) over women scientists. It shouldn't be too hard, you contentious prick.

As for anecdotal evidence, I work in a molecular ecology lab that is run by a woman who has published more scientific papers than you ever will Jaycee.

 

Ah yes, the token female on the board whose name is amongst several others on a few documents she contributed nothing to other than pressing a green button on a large machine.

I have a very contentious prick - women are forever contending with each other for it.

Spider's dick, I said 'Hard' sciences, moron, not sociology, which is all that most women can relate to. Moreover, be thankful this is not a physical forum; the last and only person since '84 who called me a 'Paki' in real life had a rather prolonged trip to the hospital. Indeed, if we were face to face, you would be in no position to call anyone anything.


Jaybee.

 

How'd you know I was talking about you?

 

Jaycebee:

No, you don't care to justify early or anytime soon becuase you fucking can't

You're just another one of those charlies stuck in his cock.

Come on, tell me about your stupid niece or your grandmother to scientifically prove to me they're your inferiour.

I'll use the patchy mold on my undies to prove why you're an idiot.

We have what- 100, 200?- little boys in boxer shorts just like you around here pretending masculinity.

 

Actually, the smell of the feces that has spewed from your mouth was just starting to leave the air until...

The woman who supervises ROMAN's lab would laugh you out of the room if you said one word about science. When you say "hard" science, I assume SPIDERGOAT thought you were just admitting that it is a difficult discipline for your brain to approach.
Fool... EDIT(sorry i called you fool, that isn't fair, but you are acting like one)

Now GENDANKEN, because you are only a tiny bit correct, if that, in your opinion that men are better suited to do science, I say you are incorrect. The vast difference in accomplishment is due mostly to sociological history.
My proof?
Look at the arenas of music and prose that you say women should be better at, "female trait", etc.
Vast under-representation of women in the halls of fame for either.
If history can do such things to an arena women should dominate, or at least equal men in, how can you say the same is not true for science.
My point?
if you are correct, let's say men are 2% more apt to do well in science (or whatever), our survey is still so biased that any bs "evidence" presented from "real life" social scenarios is worthless. You might as well say men are better at poetry and music while you're at it.

EDIT - And here comes Jaybee spewing more feces, "Caw, men are better at everything, caw caw."

Why Jaybee?

"Quack, because I need my ego stroked. I am faced with the sad possibility that I will never achieve anything that will be considered valuable by mankind, and i need to somehow take credit for the value other men have added to the world, quack."

 

I really don't want to delve much into this topic, but has anyone here realized that the guy in the article at the start of this post was being provocative in order to draw attention to the subject and encourage research into this area?
No?
Oh. Wait. It wouldn't be nice to research into such a bigoted area would it? Just like researching into racial differences is also strictly a no-no.

The reason that there is no hard evidence on this topic is because of people like this:

Nancy Hopkins, of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was one of the academics who walked out of the conference.

She said that, had she not done so, she "would have either blacked out or thrown up".​

 

I agree with what the article (First page). I have notcied this from my own experiences. Men always seem to outdo women in science and math. Its as if they were born with the talent.

 

Why is it that any thread having anything remotely to do with gender is instantly popular?
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the average poster on these sci-forums being a sexless wimp.

Even more choice - the proclamations of "men" that they are better than women in science, and yet this thread has seven pages while the science sub-forums are sparsely populated.

Kinda cute that you enjoy chatting like teenage girls more than discussing matters of, oh say astronomy?
No, the latest "disproof" of special relativity does not count.

Beyond spuriousmonkey, I'd be suprised if any of you have formal education in the sciences.
No, your community college classes do not count.

*Genuflects*
You fucking rule.

 

Somewhat ironic in that Spurious is also the one who now despises science. Maybe it's better that we haven't had a formal education?

 

Maybe, but his imput is always more interesting than "girls are dumm"

Even if he is a race-traitor.

 

Actually, it's really nothing like that at all. The most powerful people who run the lab are two women and a man that isn't masculine. In fact, gendanken and xev would get wet just looking at him and thinking about all the derision they could poor on him. That aside, he's an excellent scientist.

Most of the lab is comprised of women either working on theses (rather groundbreaking, big, complicated theses), or women in charge.

Notice that this is a molecular ecology lab, so it's science is about as hard as an economist's science. That is to say, ecology lacks a set of rules like physics does, and is mostly oversimplified models of a very complicated universe. Other than the extensive lab procedures involved, lots of maths are needed to interpret the results. Not that a dumb Paki like you would understand maths anyway. Fucking can't even add cab fare right.
So why am I explaining all this to you? It's not like you've done anything to prove your point except mention a little boy and a little girl.

Anyhow.
Women have only been in science for about 50 years, which is very little time to enter into a rather closed and contentious community. In fact, we're only going on to the second generation for women to reach any kind of seniority in science.

And as anyone in the scientific community would know, seniority is the end all.

 

It is more a love-hatred relationship.

 

have you ever had a job modeling? For every sucessful gal in that field, hundreds never make it. They have to be punctuall, presentable, dedicated + often work long hours, just like other workers do.

Is that an insult? perhaps Im not anal with my typing + spelling etc, so what? If you have to stoop to slagging me off for your arguments' sake, maybe youre not v smart yourself..?

why is being beautiful + proud of it pathetic? I just wantd my avatar to stand out.

What dos that make me then.. Cinderella?? she came out on top.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I like campfires actualy.

Are YOU a guy or a girl, gendanken?

 

Jen,
your avatar "stands out" in a couple places, for sure.
Sorry, could not resist that one.

 

Thankyou Cole!

- but why the long face..?

 

"Men are better at science."


What does it mean to be "better"?

Anyone putting in any scientific effort will realize right away that this "better" is about some complex factors of human cognitive ability, and also some other abilities, and that it is ultimately impossible to propose a finite set of traits and the standards to measure these abilities and thus determine who is better at science, men or women; and that therefore, this thread should be like only 5 posts long.

 

If you'd ever been better at something, you'd know. The first thing you notice when you experience it is that it's a really obvious black and white sort of thing with no room for an argument.
Trust me, I'm better ALOT.

I've recently found out there's alot of negros who are crime scene investigators.
And not those beautifull negros who are hybrids with only the skin colour gene stuck on negro either, real, full blown, negros.
I was a little stumped at first, but then it came to me, think how much negroids and australoids rely on reading "sign" in their surroundings for their success. They always show them on documentaries "tracking". They're really advanced at noticing things like footprints and broken branches and impressions in grass etc and putting it all together to tell a story. A skill caucasoids and mongoloids haven't really relied on so heavily since agriculture and hunting with dogs.
You can see how that skill is basically what a crime scene investigator utilises.
I just found that interesting and contraversial.
It made me mad at the world for being racist and giving those jobs to black people, stereotyping them and mocking them by giving them enough money to drive around in fancy cars.
(didn't want to lose the audience there, had to appeal to the sciforums sensibilities).

This relates to the topic somehow.
All animals are good at what they're bred to do, period.
When it comes to gender there is such a thing as sexual dimorphism, so just because the men in a family line are bred to be a certain way doesn't mean the women are.
I guess it depends which strain of homo-sapien you're talking about. Not just races but class too. Look at white trash england, they breed amongst themselves, and have different behaviour with different sexual selection factors than the upper class.
The females from the white trash british lines are bred to have unprotected sex in their teens, wear full tracksuits and be adept at pushing prams and arguing with their sparsely moustached boyfriend, and anyone else for that matter. If they aren't good at arguing with their parents and being a pain in the ass they'll be kept indoors and unable to breed. Therefore lacking the ability or will to dominate and have no respect for your parents is not favoured in the evolution of the british lower class.
You'll find they're really good at these things in accordance with their environmental demands.

So you see it depends on the breeding conditions of an animals ancestry.
Some females might be from a history where intelligent females were highly prized breeding partners. Thats not impossible.
But in general, taking into consideration the majority of the world's population are scum, there are many strains of homo-sapien producing less than briliant females.
IMO more with females than males. However, braindead males are being produced by many strains as well, there's not a particularly significant difference.
Coincidentally, lower class england is again an excellent example. Here we have populations of animals where neither partner is doing squat to survive and this goes back for many many generations. Unemployment is something like 60% in some areas, there's just generation after generation of stock being bred for their ability to make mountains in ashtrays and yell. Have you heard them speak? This is just genetic decay, there are no demands whatsoever that need to be met in order for them to breed.

There have been many cultures through history(and still are- LA trophy wives) where women just had to be beautifull and thats it. You can't expect a culture(or sub culture) to produce anything other than what's being taken into consideration with it's sexual selection.
The ditzy blonde(for example) has been bred for.