4 ms·

The difference between male and female IQ curves is easily found, and is scientifically settled. I don't particularly care if I'm contradicting the article at h

The difference between male and female IQ curves is easily found, and is scientifically settled. I don't particularly care if I'm contradicting the article at hand -- I'm not trying to vouch for it, but am saying that it's a rational discussion. >Please source this wildly inaccurate claim. I said for several decades. You cite the change for over five decades. From 1990 to today -- closing on three decades -- women in engineering has stayed virtually unchanged in the US. You seem to be taking the shotgun approach, and seem wholly ingenuine in discussing this rationally, so I would say this discussion is done.

dahart 9y ago
> The difference between male and female IQ curves is easily found, and is scientifically settled. Can you either source this or summarize, assuming that I genuinely want to know? How big is the difference in mean & median? Do you believe the difference is primarily responsible for the difference in distribution? > I said for several decades. You cite the change for over five decades. You're going to nitpick over 3 vs 5? Are you saying that the distribution of women wasn't in a steady state in the 1970's but it reached steady state in the 1990's, and that now the distributions are primarily reflective of innate biology and not social causes? The distribution of women in computer science is quite different than the distribution of women in engineering - very roughly 2x as I understand. Do you think that computer science is significantly and measurably more prone to being affected by our biological differences than engineering? I'm think I'm bringing up reasonable points, is it really a stretch to ask about different countries and different disciplines? The memo's reasoning should reasonably apply to all women in all businesses in all countries, not just engineering or tech. He even cited gender discrepancies that are cross-cultural, this is absolutely fair game. > You seem to be taking the shotgun approach, and seem wholly ingenuine in discussing this rationally I'm sorry that it's getting tough for you. I'm very genuine and very serious. I disagree that I'm being irrational, but you are entitled to your opinion. I'm just hearing defensiveness about the claims stated as fact being true. I willingly accept that there are biological differences between men and women. What I don't see clearly is a rational justification for ignoring cultural sexism.
- endorphone 9y ago
  "I'm just hearing defensiveness" Claiming defensiveness when you are being intentionally dense in the discussion is a transparent, tired tactic. "What I don't see clearly is a rational justification for ignoring cultural sexism." Absolutely no one is promoting "cultural sexism", so you're now contriving canards.
- humanrebar 9y ago
  Here's a starting point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligenc...
  - yorwba 9y ago
    Specifically, for basically the only significant difference in distribution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligence#Variability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligenc...
    - dahart 9y ago
      Thank you. So, tell me if I'm summarizing correctly. The currently accepted state of things is there's no difference in average IQ between men and women, but there is a known difference in variance which is symmetric. The variance discrepancy may be associated with specific subjects. So if we assume that the US tech sector hires only above-average people, the difference in variance could lead to some difference in mean IQ, for certain subjects, in theory. The question of what social factors bias IQ measurements is ongoing, but the top-line summary is that general intelligence is believed by many to have no sex difference. Is that accurate? I am cherry picking this one, but it's one of the most directly relevant studies cited here, and I find it interesting: "Stoet and Geary concluded that sex differences in educational achievement are not reliably linked to gender equality."
      - kofejnik 9y ago
        higher variance leads to the fact that above 130 IQ, _and_ below 70 IQ, there will be more men than women so if we select only people with very high IQ, we get more men

dahart 9y ago

> The difference between male and female IQ curves is easily found, and is scientifically settled. Can you either source this or summarize, assuming that I genuinely want to know? How big is the difference in mean & median? Do you believe the difference is primarily responsible for the difference in distribution? > I said for several decades. You cite the change for over five decades. You're going to nitpick over 3 vs 5? Are you saying that the distribution of women wasn't in a steady state in the 1970's but it reached steady state in the 1990's, and that now the distributions are primarily reflective of innate biology and not social causes? The distribution of women in computer science is quite different than the distribution of women in engineering - very roughly 2x as I understand. Do you think that computer science is significantly and measurably more prone to being affected by our biological differences than engineering? I'm think I'm bringing up reasonable points, is it really a stretch to ask about different countries and different disciplines? The memo's reasoning should reasonably apply to all women in all businesses in all countries, not just engineering or tech. He even cited gender discrepancies that are cross-cultural, this is absolutely fair game. > You seem to be taking the shotgun approach, and seem wholly ingenuine in discussing this rationally I'm sorry that it's getting tough for you. I'm very genuine and very serious. I disagree that I'm being irrational, but you are entitled to your opinion. I'm just hearing defensiveness about the claims stated as fact being true. I willingly accept that there are biological differences between men and women. What I don't see clearly is a rational justification for ignoring cultural sexism.

endorphone 9y ago
"I'm just hearing defensiveness" Claiming defensiveness when you are being intentionally dense in the discussion is a transparent, tired tactic. "What I don't see clearly is a rational justification for ignoring cultural sexism." Absolutely no one is promoting "cultural sexism", so you're now contriving canards.
humanrebar 9y ago
Here's a starting point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligenc...
- yorwba 9y ago
  Specifically, for basically the only significant difference in distribution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligence#Variability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligenc...
  - dahart 9y ago
    Thank you. So, tell me if I'm summarizing correctly. The currently accepted state of things is there's no difference in average IQ between men and women, but there is a known difference in variance which is symmetric. The variance discrepancy may be associated with specific subjects. So if we assume that the US tech sector hires only above-average people, the difference in variance could lead to some difference in mean IQ, for certain subjects, in theory. The question of what social factors bias IQ measurements is ongoing, but the top-line summary is that general intelligence is believed by many to have no sex difference. Is that accurate? I am cherry picking this one, but it's one of the most directly relevant studies cited here, and I find it interesting: "Stoet and Geary concluded that sex differences in educational achievement are not reliably linked to gender equality."
    - kofejnik 9y ago
      higher variance leads to the fact that above 130 IQ, _and_ below 70 IQ, there will be more men than women so if we select only people with very high IQ, we get more men