Bah. Just would like to add in a few of my observations (after having to do a project on the defination of Intelligence :( )
Apparently, males have a greater chance to be on both extremes of the IQ spectrum. That is to say, males, more often than females, will be either really stupid, or really smart (which may be another reason why quite a few of the breakthroughs are made by guys). However, females are more of teh 'middle' type. They are usually of the more 'average' IQ. (that is to say, the middle ground between the two extremes) Also, the reason why guys don't do that great in elementary is because we like to fool around, while girls get on task more quickly and efficiently. However, as we get older, we focus more and prioritorize (spelling?) our schoolwork better. Just an observation. Also, this coming from my sister, girls are also quite a bit more pre-occupied with other things rather than schoolwork as they grow older. As my sister would put it: "Have you ever listened to a guys' phone conversation? It goes like this: Hey... what's up... cool... nice... 'kay... bye. Now, for girls, it's quite a bit more... animated" Now, I'm not saying that she's right or not, but it's true; girls do socialize quite a bit more than guys. Oh, and another thing; people are right when they say that girls are better at the arts them guys are. However, guys can analyse data quicker. =/ It's a tradeoff. |
Quote:
I agree that society has a huge impact on the expectations of our kids... now that girls are encouraged to enter the sciences, they ARE. Even the male dominated Engineering schools like the one I attended are seeing their female enrollment increasing.(something like from 6% when I attended to almost 35% today) However, instead of proving the idea of inherent programming wrong, it as likely to be showing how much indoctrination is required to change that programming. I disagree that the differences between boys and girls are minor... in my experience they are huge, and the sooner we in western society accept it the better off we'll all be. Basic behavior of young men and women starts slightly different and diverges more and more as their bodies grow... and once puberty hits... things really get crazy. Given the option with no outside influence, young girls typically want to play with toys with faces that they can interact with... young boys typically want to play with trucks and stuff with wheels. Now the interesting question isn't whether this is true (it is), but what about the exceptions (and there are lots)? If you do set up seperate classrooms with customized teaching methods... do you allow the tomboy girls into the boys class and the sensitive boys into the girls class? That would probably cause acceptance problems and lots of negative repurcussions... but it seems like it should be an option. [ 09-23-2003, 09:04 PM: Message edited by: Thoran ] |
Well, if you put a 'sensitive' boy into a girls' class, i think that the boy would view it as offensive...
|
I believe there's another aspect that comes into play when talking about these "discoveries"...
... Specifically, who did the discovering, and who got credit for it? I recall one of my university profs talking about how one of his professors had to write a paper, so he gave a bunch of data to a bunch of students and had them mine through it, looking for anything of apparent significance. Who gets the credit -- the one who did the work, or the one whose name is on the paper? I will also add that the opportunities for women to contribute in these areas has been greater in recent years. A more significant statistic (where did that Disraeli quote go?) would be the percentage of discoveries attributed to a person of a gender related to the percentage of people in their gender in the field. So if women came up with 1% of the discoveries, but only represented 1% of the "laborers", that would put them on par with men. Ah, there's that quote: Lies, damned lies, and statistics. Next! |
Quote:
|
Once again as anti-reaction:
Anyone want a beer and stop arguing this useless discussion? :D And hug the girls next to you, and hug the boys next to you. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
<font color=white>
I really didn't think this topic would have hit it off... My points are succinct, on the whole: men are more suited to many tasks more so than women. There are female indiviuals, who can do things better than 90% of the men population, but having said that there are MORE male individuals who can do it even better. This is a fact, not fiction. WHETHER, it's because of hundreds of years of oppression, or whatever you care to catergorize. I agree. But currently it's just WRONG to say that girls are academically better than boys. I mean I admit women are better at cleaning and organising stuff. Most mean just aren't! I can NEVER fold my cloths as neatly as a girl does. Probably because I run out of patience after 30 secs. It's been genetically evolved. Centuries of split tasks have tuned our genes. All very well saying: well lets retune them as they should be. But I think we are going about this the wrong way. Just letting women into all fields leaves them under-prepared in my opinion. You are letting in a pre-historic academic gene into a modern science world. It's like letting a modern man do pre-historic hunting when you leave us at home. We can all do it [img]smile.gif[/img] but we are not good at it YET. Just looking at the year 2002-03. Looking at the top 50 Scientific and Engineering breakthroughs, women almost doesn't feature in them. Why? It's not because they are dumb, or because we are sexiest, it's because they are uder the illusion that they've done well in their exams, surely that means success??? Do not get me wrong, I don't care what sex of our human kind makes science breakthroughs, as long as we do. [img]smile.gif[/img] I love girls in lab coats.. they look great! JOKE! *gets more bricks* No seriously, I don't care. But what annoys me is the fact that it's not reflected in exams. Exams are not showing what qualities are needed to be creative, but rather what qualities are needed to do an exam. And these give a faulse illusion to all the girls out there, that they are actually making progress. Exams are 50% of the story. Wrong, even less of in a science field. I can not speak for the arts, but in science the other 50-60% os about all the little things. Reading geeky magazines, talking to geeks over the net, doing scary lil experiments in your garage, and going into those weird shops most laugh at. It's the practical voyage of invention plus text book hard work that pushes science forward. I am sorry, but I just don't see many girls do that 60%. They work extremely hard on the 40% and get full marks in exams. but when you're at work, it's not an exam. It's hads on decision making and experience. Something carried over the years. Avy </font> </font> [ 09-25-2003, 10:32 AM: Message edited by: Avatar ] |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:03 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2024 Ironworks Gaming & ©2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved