Is It Sexist If It's Based On Scientific Fact?

I think you'll find though in most categories of intelligence women would beat men.

With the human auditory system there is a noticeable difference between the range a female can hear and a male, with both total range and the distinct range ( what we are best of hearing), and males loose especially the higher ranges a lot earlier.

And as language, communication, writing were our last little evolutionary steps, all those parts would work better in female brains


Not that it really matters cos no one listens , but overall they are smarter, at least in the sense all the different sections in the brain work better


And apparently testosterone makes you smart if you get an extra dose in the womb, but makes you dumber if you get an extra doses when you are growing up

 

IQ tests are flawed. For example they don't measure creative ability at all. However, there is a strong correlation between high IQ and academic success in the math and sciences.

 

Are men as intuitive as the females?...can can that even be measured?
I say no.....and intelligence cannot really be measured, imo......
There are different levels of it.

 

The best test of intelligence in STEM is not GPA or IQ, watson or crick, I can't remember which one, only had an IQ of 114 and he won a nobel prize for discovering the structure of DNA.

The best test of intelligence at least in STEM is success in the real world bcs for example the structure of DNA is not a human construct like an IQ test; it's a natural construct.

But even Bill Gates contributes much of his success to luck. He said he had the right abilities at the right time. So luck is a factor in success in the real world.

For example, if Beethoven were alive today would he still be considered a genius??? Maybe, by some people who are really into classical music, but IMO not by most people.

 

I hate to say it though but something like 93% of the Noble Prizes that have been won have been won by one of the genders and not the other.

Much of this could be attributed to discrimination in the past, however it's still something like 93%

I know for sure it's greater than 90%

I wish it were 50/50, but it is what it is

 

I like this post and touched on much of what I wanted to say...

I don't think it's sexist to say on average a particular sex is bound to excel more or less at a particular mental/physical task. This is likely to lead testable, predictive results which is a lot of what science is about. However intelligence is too vague of a concept, so without a particular qualifier (Procedural, intuitive, organizational, etc) or parameters of a particular gender based intelligence test, I'd be skeptical about the results.

 

I just say women are superior to men. That's not scientific fact either. It is factually science that women never get the better part of an argument for justice. Why? WTF: the message is not that understood for: what is called thinking?

 

A male could potentially live past the life expectancy age of humans and make it to a 100, but is it sexist to say that on average women live longer than men?

In a good study, you may only be looking at 2 groups but you will be sampling a representative population of each group, which should allow for some type of claims to be made or theories.

 

Well, if you were an alien studying humans and one of the things you used to elucidate human behavior was television finding that women are superior to men would be a wise conclusion to make.

In nearly every single sitcom the husband is a goof and the wife is the intelligent one-she's a saint having to put up with her husbands idiotic but hilarious antics.

 

But I believe the sitcom was written by man, a man who in the real world is afraid of the Jihad. :sunny:

 

possibly, but there are more female english majors that there are male english majors

 

Only since Clinton's first piece of business in 1992. Just being intuitive.

 

Everyone, these are great responses. Keep 'em coming.

You make some good points, MVW, but I think you might be misunderstanding my point (or rather my purpose in asking the question). I don't have a specific study in mind. I don't actually have an opinion on who's smarter--men or women--or whether they're equal. What I'm trying to do is get a feel for what's considered sexist and what isn't among feminists. I've only dabbled in feminism lightly over the passed couple of years, on and off, so I wouldn't say I know feminism in and out, but I am curious.

The question I asked--would scientifically gathered results count as sexist if they showed either men or women to be superior to the other on some trait or ability?--was to see what feminists considered sexist or not. I thought it was a good question because it tests certain border or "fringe" cases, by which I mean cases that aren't so clear cut as to whether one should consider them sexist or not. I mean, if some bigoted ignoramus shamelessly blurted out "women are so stupid," I don't think there'd be any question that the person is sexist. And if a study came out stating that women are, on average, shorter than men, I don't think there'd be any question here either that the study is not sexist. But what about an in-between case, like a study on intelligence, one that came out showing one sex to be superior to the other?--that would be a bit more controversial and I think there would be a question. So I thought it would be a good question to ask as it gauges an area where I could certainly learn a bit more about the feminist perspective.

This is why I'm saying that the example of intelligence is beside the point. It's also why I think it's OK to treat it as merely a hypothetical thought experiment (i.e. it's not a precursor to a debate I want to get into on why men really are more intelligent than women, with all my scientific research ready to be thrown at you). As a hypothetical thought experiment, I thought we could just assume that the science was conducted rigorously and without bias--obviously, in the real world, you can never totally get rid of bias and scientists are sometimes sloppy--but those real world facts had nothing to do with what I was really getting at--namely, what do feminists consider sexist--and so it misses the point of my question.

 

I think we've proven in this thread, beyond all reasonable doubt, the female brain is superior

Different like when one thing is superior to the other, they are different

 

I once explored that same subject in an article I wrote some time ago.

Racial Difference
By Shale
October 1995
(Published: INTERRACE Magazine Vol. 7, No 1, issue 35, 1996)

"Increasingly, the political correctness pressures to make everyone equal, has become a confused effort at denying that anyone is different. Forgotten is the fact that equality does not require us to be a bland, genderless, unit of a colorless whole.

Instead of feeling free to celebrate diversity, everyone now has to second guess every comment that might draw attention to anyone's difference. While it's an observable fact that most African-Americans have more melanin in their skin than do most European-Americans, only those who are defiantly honest will dare say it.

Do I exaggerate? In 199l, a team of California researchers discovered that black women develop more bone mass than do white women at puberty. Although this fact is beneficial to the black women, who suffer fewer broken bones from the affects of osteoporosis in old age, the researchers were concerned about releasing the findings because it might feed racial stereotypes. But racial differences have already been established in other physical ailments, most prominent being sickle cell disease which affects black Africans and some Mediterranean whites. Statistics show that young white men get more testicular cancer than young black men. Blacks get more lung cancer than Whites. Cystic fibrosis affects mostly people of European origin. What causes these differences is not always known, but the demographics are there nonetheless, and it would be foolish for scientists to ignore them."<snip>

 

Yes if a study found that men are more intelligent than women, those researchers who made that study careers would be finished-I bet.

But if a study found that women are more intelligent than men those researchers who made that study would win the Nobel Prize-I bet.

Anyone wanna bet????