Men Are Smarter Than Women

[Kay 0]

You had equal rights a while ago; right now, I would say that you have better than equal rights and that men are routinely discriminated against.

Care to explain how men are discriminated against more than women?

[bajo39 0]

Care to explain how men are discriminated against more than women?

For the program I took at university, engineering, women were admitted with lesser qualifications because apparently there not enough women in the field. Even after graduation though, the same situation exists. Women are still admitted to certain positions with lower qualifications, often to make up a quota under an equal opportunity program which nearly all feminised countries have. Aside from being admitted at a lower standard, they are then promoted faster for the same reasons. This is my biggest gripe but have a look at the below which I copied froma UK (where you live) website:

1. Education

significant numbers of women-only courses, from which men excluded

funding for such courses e.g. women-returners, which is not available to men.

2. Employment

programmes to

[monza gorilla 1]

Well I got 112, I'm not good at these damn mathematic things.

No offence, Jem, but:

For the program I took at university, engineering, women were admitted with lesser qualifications because apparently there not enough women in the field. Even after graduation though, the same situation exists. Women are still admitted to certain positions with lower qualifications, often to make up a quota under an equal opportunity program which nearly all feminised countries have. Aside from being admitted at a lower standard, they are then promoted faster for the same reasons. This is my biggest gripe but have a look at the below which I copied froma UK (where you live) website:

1. Education

significant numbers of women-only courses, from which men excluded

funding for such courses e.g. women-returners, which is not available to men.

2. Employment

programmes to 'encourage women into certain professions', while none to encourage men e.g. Women Into Science & Engineering (WISE)

training courses for women-only e.g. women-returners

male unemployment rate is higher

changes in types of industry, away from men-based manufacturing to women-based service industries, while no support to assist men at all

3. Taxation

widow's bereavement allowance, none for widowers

transfer of personal allowances husband to wife, not vice versa

4. Social Security

state pension age difference of 5 years, combined with average age of death, men pay in 5 years longer and draw out 11 years less

[Kay 0]

There are big generalisations, for example I know of several women who got longer sentences for abuse of their child than fathers do get, the women who miss out on a job purely because they haven't had children yet. I'll pick more holes in it later when I have more time.

[Jenson_Rules 0]

Excellent research dan.

I must also add that the legal system in general is VERY sympathetic to women. For example a woman can claim to have suffered ''battered wife'' syndrome and thus killed their husbands/partners yet they will have their sentence shortened and lessened to manslaughter and will probably not even end up in prison in certain cases. yet if a man tries to claim this he would be laughed at and sentenced to life imprisonment. I did have statistics from law on this (and yes some men are mentally abused and physically abused by women!) and its something like 97% will be charged with murder against summin as ridiculousl;y low as 30% of women. Highly unfair just because women are said to be ;;weaker'' when that isnt always the case.

Another interesting point is women have far more excuses available than men, like PMS (only in severe cases though) and other things.

Overall men are far more discriminated against than women. You bitches are ****ing taking us all for a ride

ok maybe i shouldnt have said that but its true, we are getting used and abused.

[Kay 0]

Point 1, is to equalise the situation as we have had gender exclusive subjects for ages, not long ago women were stopped from doing things apart from needle work and cooking. Did you check to see if this funding is from individual companies or the government itself?

Point 2, yet again, you seem to have missed the point of where the UK has been before, women didn't do subjects such as engineering as they were discouraged from the field as it was "mens" work, therefore if these women are to go into this field now, they need training, whereas men already have been taught this before. Male unemployment being higher doesn't mean there have worse rates, could be a product of laziness. That's called technology, nothing to do with government policy, robots can do a lot of men's work now. So much for being real clever eh? I remember the fact that women took over men's posts during the war, when the men returned they were kicked out of their jobs with no support either. Pretty similar to me.

Point 3, Rubbish go check one of my links.

Point 4, Now women are more equal on the earnings foot the government are changing the policy so it is the same age for both. As for benefits I can find nothing which indicates it is higher for women or that is based on gender. This source of yours seems very sexist to the point it doesn't do the research, either that or they read the part where one of the conditions is "expecting your husband's baby" and didn't realise you can't be expecting your wifes baby if she is dead.

Point 5, bus passes are generally for those over 60 that I know of, no age gap there, plus yet again the pension age is going to be the same. Women were forced to die for the right to vote.

Point 6, there are ones for men, we had one spammed on a site I go on. All cancers are studied in depth, I'd imagine the break down of funds is based on how common each cancer is, I see nothing that says anything different. There has been a massive increase in information to do with prostate cancer as well.

Point 7 both genders do that, that is not from within the UK, anyone can try to make false accusations, that's nothing to do with having better than equal rights.

I got to this stage of looking things up and realised it seems very dated as everything can be argued back with recent policies or information, I typed into google and found your source is over 5 years old.

Links to back me up (see you provided none)

http://www.direct.gov.uk/Bfsl1/BenefitsAnd...&chk=CBpLg1

http://www.thepensionservice.gov.uk/atoz/a.../rpforecast.asp

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4867008.stm

Try something recent now.

Excellent research? All he did was type in men discrimination or words to that effect and copy and pasted, without even checking if it was up-to-date. Which I found it was not.

Do you really want a period as well then just to have an excuse? Believe me, it isn't worth it. So women get more domestic violence than men, these new policies are to try and help these women rather than let them suffer like before. Unless you want that? People are always going to try and cheat the system by making false accusations, but that stands for both sexes, as it is a trait.

[bajo39 0]

At the risk of getting into a never-ending circular argument at which you are a specialist of note, I'll provide a brief response to part of your argument.

Point 1, is to equalise the situation as we have had gender exclusive subjects for ages, not long ago women were stopped from doing things apart from needle work and cooking. Did you check to see if this funding is from individual companies or the government itself?

Not long ago? When exactly were women prohibited from taking engineering courses? I would imagine that it was anything but recent as you seem to imply. I think you probably mean that women were discouraged from taking certain courses, like engineering for example, but what of the subjects that men were discouraged from taking, like home economics? Do men face easier admissions requirements to such programs? No, because the education system is biased against men as I have told you.

Point 2, yet again, you seem to have missed the point of where the UK has been before, women didn't do subjects such as engineering as they were discouraged from the field as it was "mens" work, therefore if these women are to go into this field now, they need training, whereas men already have been taught this before. Male unemployment being higher doesn't mean there have worse rates, could be a product of laziness. That's called technology, nothing to do with government policy, robots can do a lot of men's work now. So much for being real clever eh? I remember the fact that women took over men's posts during the war, when the men returned they were kicked out of their jobs with no support either. Pretty similar to me.

You say that if women want to go into engineering, they need training. Well, I got news for you sweetheart, men need the same training. Engineering know-how is not heredity contrary to your imagination.

[Kay 0]

Men have had the training already though, as they were not discouraged in the first place, which is why women still need it - as they didn't take it, so nothing to do with my imagination, you just misunderstood (probably purposely) what I said. It's not biased against men, certainly not the education system itself which is not what we're talking about in this case. I did a whole sociology module on Education and achieved an A, so I would know if our education system was unequal. The only major inequality with it is with ethnicity, where you are talking about labelling, pupil subcultures, teacher racism, ethnocentric curriculum and institutional racism. In fact for education it's been argued the other way, as girls have little in the way or role models when they reach the higher levels of education.

Don't sweetheart me, Mr Copy & Paste.

[bajo39 0]

Men have had the training already though, as they were not discouraged in the first place, which is why women still need it - as they didn't take it, so nothing to do with my imagination, you just misunderstood (probably purposely) what I said. It's not biased against men, certainly not the education system itself which is not what we're talking about in this case. I did a whole sociology module on Education and achieved an A, so I would know if our education system was unequal. The only major inequality with it is with ethnicity, where you are talking about labelling, pupil subcultures, teacher racism, ethnocentric curriculum and institutional racism. In fact for education it's been argued the other way, as girls have little in the way or role models when they reach the higher levels of education.

Notwithstanding your 'A' on the study of education, I would suggest to you that there is further study to be done by you if you cannot see that women benefit from easier admission requirements to certain courses while men do not. It's apparent to everyone here that in this instance the system is prejudiced against men.

[Kay 0]

Notwithstanding your 'A' on the study of education, I would suggest to you that there is further study to be done by you if you cannot see that women benefit from easier admission requirements to certain courses while men do not. It's apparent to everyone here that in this instance the system is prejudiced against men.

At what level is this course?

If it is past A Levels as I suspect then it's not seen as part of the education system itself. I need to do no more study, it's you that has to use the work of others to try and sound good. Ask anyone who has done Sociology, they'll say the same. There are areas which suit males more than females and vice versa, but they cancel one another out at the end result.

BTW it's apparent to everyone here yet how many have replied? Don't talk rubbish. Especially when I have already stated twice we're not talking about something considered the education system. Read my posts.

[Autumnpuma 0]

Here is an interesting situation that proves nothing...but it's still interesting:

My wife has more 'education' than I do (college degrees), comes from a more educated background than I do (very few of my family have gone to college and all of her family have gone), she has read 10 times (literally) more books than I have (with the exceptions being Biology, Anthropology and Engineering) and generally wins all our arguments (I am left with a confused look on my face after each argument).

Now, all the above being true, we both have the exact same IQ. Just a little factoid that, as I've said, proves nothing

[bajo39 0]

Here is an interesting situation that proves nothing...but it's still interesting:

My wife has more 'education' than I do (college degrees), comes from a more educated background than I do (very few of my family have gone to college and all of her family have gone), she has read 10 times (literally) more books than I have (with the exceptions being Biology, Anthropology and Engineering) and generally wins all our arguments (I am left with a confused look on my face after each argument).

Now, all the above being true, we both have the exact same IQ. Just a little factoid that, as I've said, proves nothing

For an example that hits closer to home, look at Kay Zee's convoluted, illogical babling in the forum and compare that to my writing which is rather more sensible and concise. Kay Zee apparently has a higher IQ though - shocking, isn't it?

[Kay 0]

Awww bless can't accept that you were wrong, because you were talking about university courses which I had already pointed out, yet you had ignored. Rather than accepting it you decided not to respond.

Love the fact you say "apparently", unlike some, I am no liar, I do have a high IQ and I am according to many around me, very clever, though I have a lack of self belief. You are not better than any other here, so I'd stop talking like you are - putting others down and building yourself, it's a terrible attitude to have.

Copy and Pasting btw is not being sensible and concise, that is taking someone else's work. Hence when you use others work you don't look things up and that's why you ended up being so wrong, as you took out of date work, a lesson for next time I believe.

[BradSpeedMan 6]

Awww bless can't accept that you were wrong, because you were talking about university courses which I had already pointed out, yet you had ignored. Rather than accepting it you decided not to respond.

Love the fact you say "apparently", unlike some, I am no liar, I do have a high IQ and I am according to many around me, very clever, though I have a lack of self belief. You are not better than any other here, so I'd stop talking like you are - putting others down and building yourself, it's a terrible attitude to have.

Copy and Pasting btw is not being sensible and concise, that is taking someone else's work. Hence when you use others work you don't look things up and that's why you ended up being so wrong, as you took out of date work, a lesson for next time I believe.

I see you as very clever lady Kay-Zee, judging from your postings, no one can dispute that. I was impressed cause I first thought you male, this is not to degrade women, just telling the truth

[monza gorilla 1]

Men have had the training already though, as they were not discouraged in the first place, which is why women still need it - as they didn't take it, so nothing to do with my imagination

That ain't necessarily so.

[cavallino 2]

and this despite men’s life expectancy already being 6 years less than women’s

That's biological, live with it, that would be like women complaining about men being physically stronger.

circumcision on men is still allowed by law, while being a criminal offence on women

What a moronic assertion, that one sentence demolishes the credibility of whoever you posted and wherever you posted from. This person has issues..

As for the study, I am open to opinions on the subject, but on first glance this sounds ridiculous. It is based on SAT scores If you went by SAT scores, Indians would have superhuman intelligence compared to Americans. Also since I answered every single question in the SAT exam, I must either be superhuman, or far more likely SAT and by inference this study do not even test the limits of intelligence.

[bajo39 0]

As for the study, I am open to opinions on the subject, but on first glance this sounds ridiculous. It is based on SAT scores If you went by SAT scores, Indians would have superhuman intelligence compared to Americans. Also since I answered every single question in the SAT exam, I must either be superhuman, or far more likely SAT and by inference this study do not even test the limits of intelligence.

You should go through it in more detail...

[cavallino 2]

Well, what have I missed - did I say anything incorrect in that post?

[bajo39 0]

Well, what have I missed - did I say anything incorrect in that post?

You said that at first glance it sounds ridiculous but I would propose to you that upon further study you'll find it quite reasonable. Maybe if the article doesn't do it for you, you could read the entire study?

It is a known fact that men have physically larger brains than women so why is it ridiculous that we also have higher IQs?

[Kay 0]

Well, what have I missed - did I say anything incorrect in that post?

Not that I can say, quite right to show that your IQ isn't the be all and end all.

[bajo39 0]

Not that I can say, quite right to show that your IQ isn't the be all and end all.

You might want to try rewriting that in an intelligible form... In fact, my advice is that you read all of your posts after writing them and then edit such that we don't have to guess what you're talking about.

[Sato 0]

You might want to try rewriting that in an intelligible form... In fact, my advice is that you read all of your posts after writing them and then edit such that we don't have to guess what you're talking about.

Once again interesting after your post about being attacked before....

[bajo39 0]

Once again interesting after your post about being attacked before....

My post wasn't motivated by my dislike for Kay_Zee, it was motivated by my dislike for wasting time reading posts that are unintelligible. There needs to be a certain standard of writing on any forum and those who are continually in violation of this standard need to be persuaded to improve...

In any case, the post you quoted was not a part of any argument and hence does not constitute an ad hominem...

[Sato 0]

My post wasn't motivated by my dislike for Kay_Zee, it was motivated by my dislike for wasting time reading posts that are unintelligible. There needs to be a certain standard of writing on any forum and those who are continually in violation of this standard need to be persuaded to improve...

In any case, the post you quoted was not a part of any argument and hence does not constitute an ad hominem...

I sure hope you whinge about posters like Narain Fan then. Or does it only happen when someone else might of proved a point or 2 that you were against?

[bajo39 0]

I sure hope you whinge about posters like Narain Fan then. Or does it only happen when someone else might of proved a point or 2 that you were against?

Who proved a point that I was against?