164
165

Gender differences extremely apparent in the "intelligent elite" (self.TheRedPill)

Laptopbutt が 投稿

This post was inspired something on the science subreddit linked to this article post in nature. I wasn't out searching for anything RP but once you're accustomed to RP philosophy it shows up everywhere.

 

Summary: They started to nurture intellectually gifted children in the late 60's and built a program dedicated to tracking these "whiz kids" throughout their life to see where they ended up. When the most recent follow up study was done in 2013, a very apparent dichotomy appeared between males and females. In general, males appeared more dedicated to contributing to society, working hard and living in a meritocracy while females preferred as little work hours as possible, time to socialize and a provider society. Even the most intelligent women would rather game the system.

 

There have been many studies trying to predict what children are going to contribute most to society, becoming the future leaders, scientists, businessmen and lawmakers of the world. Not many have been successful (look at the Terman Study which didn't provide very reliable markers for intelligence). The hardest part is finding the best metric to measure success. Is it mathematical intelligence? Social intelligence? Literacy? Physical prowess? Obviously there is no one size fits all approach to measure success or predict it. Joe Stanley came pretty close though.

 

THE PROGRAM

Joseph Stanley started using the SAT to filter out his gifted students for his study and focused heavily on success in STEM fields. Stanley credits this to the ability of the SAT to test spatial relationships between objects and ideas as the key to its predictive ability. He believed that this was the major predictor of innovative talent and being that we spend our lives comparing our perceived reality to that which we can imagine I can see why he might be right. He called his program the Study for Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY). The SAT seemed to be an accurate enough predictor of success in STEM fields. They admitted kids to the program and followed up with them throughout their careers and lives. Now most of these men and women are around age 40-50 and have reached the peak of their careers.

 

THE RESULTS

The distribution of employment fields leaves little up to speculation. Men orient themselves towards high wage and prestige positions (CEOs/STEM/IT) while women are oriented more towards social sciences (education/homemaking). The gender divide was most evenly distributed among physicians, lawyers, and consultants but this was a smaller percentage of the group. The divide may be explained by fact that women naturally pursue more socially oriented jobs while men pursue more object/subject matter oriented jobs which, in the end, tend to be higher paying. It also appears that men are still always the breadwinners in the relationship.

Next the study directors asked personality questions and compared the answers across genders. The more male traits produced bars to the right and the more female traits produced bars to the left. The real fun begins when we get into a woman's willingness to work. Men are more willing to work for their ideal job over 40 hours a week. Remember we are talking about extremely intelligent people supposedly at the spearhead of progressing society. When we break down their personal motivation for career paths we see some stark differences: Men pursue a challenging, prestigious, highly paid job in a meritocracy while women focus on working low hours and having friendly coworkers. This may explain why men pursued more challenging and high paying jobs than women.

And finally I have saved the BEST for last: personal beliefs and mannerisms compared across genders. Men have stronger opinions about their worth and their contribution to society that isn't hindered by emotional or physical stress. Meanwhile women have a view that resources should be shared and society has a responsibility to take care of its own. I do not know if this difference in attitude for women is purely philanthropic or if it is a means to help themselves.

 

LESSONS LEARNED

Intelligence can't separate us from our primal instincts as men and women. Men are willing to work hard for prestige and power while women prefer to live in a society that protects and provides for them with little work. I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule but I was surprised at how apparent it was in those who are supposed to be of top intelligence. I'm also curious if these trends will continue into the future as these are adults from the boomer generation. There is a lot we can still ask of the data this is just a interesting peek into the looking glass.

Keep grinding and keep this world turning boys. The future is in our hardworking fists.

 

 

Journal article cited from is "Life Paths and Accomplishments of Mathematically Precocious Males and Females Four Decades Later". Links to their published articles can be found here

全 20 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]rayyaal 50ポイント51ポイント  (5子コメント)

What I would be interested in seeing is the disparity between individuals within a gender group. For example, what percentage of men adhere to these standards vs men who don't. Same with women, I'd love to see the variations within the gender. In fact, age would be an interesting variable too.

Thanks for writing this up, shit like this never gets posted on TRP. All we get is 'I am redpilled, give me validation' posts now.

[–]cthulhu_calling_ 23ポイント24ポイント  (3子コメント)

This is a great post. I agree there is too much self masturbatory material going on currently. This here shows the scientific proof of the sexes (yes there are only two) and their natural state imperative; Men tend toward culture/nation building while women are maintainers from the social aspect.

[–]2G_Petronius 17ポイント18ポイント  (1子コメント)

Men tend toward culture/nation building while women are maintainers from the social aspect.

It's more primal than that. Homo sapiens and its predecessors spent millions of years living thusly:

  • men would hunt and protect the tribe from other males

  • women would gather vegetables and rear children

In this situation, males were selected for a) their ability to excel at high risk / high reward tasks like hunting and fighting and b) their ability to compete with other males while at the same time establishing functioning hierarchies necessary for effective collaboration, since collaboration was absolutely fundamental in both hunting and fighting.

Women were selected for their ability to form semi-egualitarian peer structures that minimized risk (since women had a far smaller ability of successfully resolving conflict through violence).

All of our social instincts derive from these long-ingrained gender roles. Men constructing hierarchies means men construct and lead governments, institutions, companies. Women are far more drawn towards and better at activities that rely on consensus and low risk-taking, which means they tend to take a background support role.

[–]razormachine 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

When man need something they create it. By building, fixing, fighting, hunting... you name it.

When woman need things they whine until man create those things for woman.

Feminists constantly go on and on about the patriarchy. Off-course we have a patriarch civilization, man were the ones who had build it.

The female version of civilization is feminism. They had organised themselves into system where they get "free stuff" by constantly whining.

There will never be a matriarchy (or it will be short-lived) because female version of civilization is a parasitic one.

When feminist finally destroy (better term is suck dry) the evil patriarchy feminism is going down with it.

[–]abetterarsonist -5ポイント-4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm a good control group. I'm a music guy who beleived the bullshit. Ended up with a psychotic episode and almost a decade in prison. But I have a reasonably high IQ.

[–]GrowlingBears 9ポイント10ポイント  (4子コメント)

that we spend our lives comparing our perceived reality

Women do not do this. This is the fundamental underlying realization about the female psyche. Reality is internalized and made to fit their current emotional state. Men by comparison push their perceptions out into the world and test how they hold up. If this is to be the test of rationality, women are absolutely not rational beings. And this can be used to influence and control them as well as emotional or feminized men.

[–]melb22 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Something to this. Men's minds are often directed at penetrating the reality around them, trying to get at the way things work. There is a real effort to understand, to get to the truth of things. The male mind can operate in a relatively detached and analytical way while doing this. Not sure this is equally true of women, at least in my experience. Women are more moved by the emotions they are currently experiencing in comparison to men.

[–]GrowlingBears 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Men are capable of abstracting concepts of reality into a thought model and then conduct analysis on that model to reveal truths. Women take things at face value then rely upon the way they feel about it to determine if it provides advantage. Women do not improve things, they can't. They have very limited capacity for abstraction. Not my opinion, this is actually statistically support in clinical studies. It's downright cruel to push women into science, math, and engineering due to this limited or absent capacity for abstraction. Electrical engineering is the worst demonstration of this. There is nothing to see or have feelings about, everything is already completely abstracted from normal reality so women perform poorly across the board in this field.

[–]Laptopbutt[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Reality is internalized and made to fit their current emotional state

This is a really, really good point. Presumptively, a man's perceived value focuses on in improving the external world while a woman's focus is directed on improving themselves (their perceived world) via the largest gains through marginal work.

[–]GrowlingBears 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Perfect way of explaining it. Women engage in minimal effort endeavors and use their social advantages to increase the reward potential. If this wasn't true why are women so lazy.

[–]anihilistlol 4ポイント5ポイント  (3子コメント)

I'd question the validity of your conclusions.

While gender discrimination, in aggregate, is non-existent today, I highly doubt it didn't exist in the 1960s. That was only 40 years after women were given the right to vote. I would imagine that gender roles would probably have shaped what jobs women and men took on.

A more useful study would be tracking people growing up in the early 2000s.

Also, the SAT was never well correlated with, at least, academic success, which is why the College Board has to continuously rewrite the test and colleges accept alternative exams like the ACT.

[–]RedDeadCred 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

Don't know if you know this but the ratio of men to women with IQs above 140 is 20 to 1. With 3.5 billion women that's a lot of geniuses but clearly men always have and always will be the predominate inventors and movers of the world.

[–]CoyoteeBongwater 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

his comment still holds some merit though.

with this extreme push of women into these nontraditional roles, it'd be interesting to see what the smartest of the smart women would end up doing in a world where it's encouraged to move into fields/work that they may have no interest in.

Even though the "tabboo" of women in the workplace is gone, would they choose a lifestyle based on social pressures or actual preferences. And after that if most would hold those same social beliefs that

resources should be shared and society has a responsibility to take care of its own.

we can all agree this shit isn't gonna come to an end, hopefully some kinda decrease due to ever increasing evidence that some stuff isn't for most women and it's not sexist but science; but it'd be interesting to see if anything became different from all this bullshit

[–]zintarweb 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

The article stated that only the math portion of the sat was used. A later, more subjective test using pure spatial relationship and visualization tests were also used.

The children in question were elementary level, and while elementary kids of the era may have had preexisting prejudices regarding boy/girl educational objectives, it is only those female children that passed the exams at all that were part of the program. As far as my understanding of the reading goes.

So with that in mind, it seems like a useful benchmark from which you could compare later studies. However, you still have modern examples such as the Nordic countries with the highest levels of gender equality legislations and programs that still have similar results.

The biggest take away, imo, is that children should be screened often and early, taken away from repressive environments such as No Child Allowed in Front and be fully nurtured to maximize their capacities.

[–]FreeRadical5 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Keep grinding and keep this world turning boys. The future is in our hardworking fist.

No thanks. I will do what only what improves my life. Fix the system and reward the right behavior if you want me to work.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

  • "Society has a responsibility to meet the basic need of all its members"
  • "It is important for me that nobody goes without"

The two statements with the greatest emphasis by females.

Ladies, I'm fully with you here. Truly. Just remember, sex is a basic need, and when discussing about men, it is the basic need.

Hey, don't stomp on eachother volunteering to cover it, now...

-Adam

[–]RealMcGonzo 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Intelligence can't separate us from our primal instincts as men and women.

? Lesson learned? Seriously? This explains many downvotes, thanks. I had no idea, like a moron I just assumed that everyone was . . . well not more or less where I am, not on the same page or even chapter, but at least in the same book. The spectrum of readers of this sub is wider than most of us can appreciate.

[–]kremer5 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

women aren't designed to work like men are. to be upset that women aren't out there engineering the world is fucking stupid. that's like getting a cat and then being mad it doesn't fetch a ball.

read up on evo psychology/gender roles OP.

[–]climbingvagabond -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

What about the roles pressed upon either gender regardless of intelligence?