A few days ago the UK released statistics that once again girls were outperforming boys in high school to which a Financial Times female journalist quipped: "Whenever women outperform men it's a problem that requires national attention. The other way around, no one cares."
This has been going on for decades; girls outperform boys in school and the numbers decline as they enter graduate schools particularly in the STEM sector. The reasons in conducted research is always the same socialization, better behavior, more discipline, more risk adverse behavior etc.
Recently I came across an article in which a 17 year old Hannah Cairo had disproven a math theorem. It reminded me of the fact that DNA was not discovered by Watson and Crick, but their graduate student Rosalind Franklin. Recent groundbreakers include physicist Lisa Randall (superstrings and hyperspace/extra dimensions), Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer Doudna (Nobel prize for CRISPR) and Ilaria Capua (Virologist). All of whom encountered misogyny and discussed in interviews how it slowed down their careers. Randall was already famous, invited as keynote speaker to a conference in Italy where someone assumed she was "Professor Lisa's assistant."
But what if that repetitive research is partially wrong? If no one is researching IQ in longterm studies between men and women, how could we prove that the IQ of women remains high? What if millenia of resourcefulness and finding solutions actually changed brain development? What if and this is what I'm getting at, women arent just as intelligent as men but more intelligent and, therefore, make smarter choices early on?
Something to think about.
Let's also include Ada Lovelace, also Hailey's Comet was predicted by a woman and then there were the cryptoanalysts/code breakers during WWII, just a few more on the list.
ReplyDeleteAs to why women's achievements in science and culture and politics etc are generally overlooked or undervalued, I believe has nothing to do with female intelligence but rather patriarchy. But that's not what you attempt to show her, I assume.
IQ tests have been debunked as measures of intelligence for a fairly long time, certainly as early as the 1970s when I studied linguistics and psychology at uni. It continues to be a popular thing and certainly there are versions that can be reliably reproduced but they only measure a specific aspect of intelligence suitable for certain academic work but not human intelligence - which e.g. includes social and creative aspects, cognitive skills (abstract thinking in childhood) usually ignored by IQ tests.
Codex: Of course it's the patriarchy and it's a short post so I focused on recent exceptional women of this century.
ReplyDeleteIQ tests are indicators many now include visual spatial and problem solving. The modern ones do include what you mention.
Well Sabine why do women outperform men? What if the smart ones are smarter?
My impulsive response would be: women can multitask way better than men, if this is a measure of smart, that's the one I would put forward.
DeleteI do know that I could go and find some research on this, also recent anthropology findings, all in support of my claim and also explaining it (anthropology findings do that really well) but I have to go and water the vegetables while going through a manuscript edit for a women's start-up developing co-operative local renewable energy clusters on my phone screen and picking slugs off the cabbages.
Codex: Sabine
DeleteUnless research is conducted and funded, policies and laws won't change. Did you know that when it comes to illness it takes an average of ten years LONGER for women to be diagnosed? And that unless research exists to point this out nothing is done about it.
I worked for the medical faculty at the local uni for 25+ years, you are telling me nothing new.
DeleteCodex: There are online claims that testosterone is responsible for higher IQ. False.
DeleteThe clue is in the words "online claims". Whatever that means.
DeleteCodex: @Sabine. It 's being propagated on SM
DeleteI think individual intelligence is only part of it, since social construct plays a huge role. Misogyny exists and I know in my Corporate Lives, a Woman HAD to outperform any of her Male counterparts or she was overlooked for promotions and discriminated against. And often you still were, unless you made your own leverage, which, many Women became adept at in various ways. Some made their Stripes by their actual performance at the actual job, others sexualized the position and had affairs with prominent Men... it still happens all the time. Back in those days it was legal to pay us less than the Men doing the same Job, even if we did the Job better. My Dear Dad schooled me that when I was at the top of my Game in the Corporate World, they may never Respect me becoz of my Gender, so make sure they Feared me. That worked excellently. I was an AVP of a Bank running Three Departments in my 1st Corporate Life and once had an Old White Male VP call me a Bitch to my face, I calmly told him I wasn't "A" Bitch, I was THE Bitch, and that would be Miss Bitch to him! After that I had no problems with him and in fact he mentored me, go figure, it just took racking his Balls to make him realize I had a set of my own that he just couldn't see. And I'd go Balls to the Wall to take down anyone in my way. *Winks*
ReplyDeleteCodex: Good for you! I was thinking out loud; if women need to outperform and do, maybe they should just be the main performers to begin with?!?
DeleteResearch would provide quantifiable data, but I suspect your (implied) hypothesis is correct...for example, imagine a world run by women...likely quite an improvement...except for Kristi Noem, etc.
ReplyDeleteCodex: It's only anecdotal, but the amount of times women found a solutions that stumped others...
DeleteI don't know if a matriarchy would be the answer. (Holy s..t. while typing it corrected to patriarchy). I'd be happy with 50%
I think that women like that imitate bad male behavior and are rewarded for it. Thatcher to name one example.
A well run Matriarchy works quite well becoz it does not diminish the role of it's Men, like a Patriarchy diminishes it's Women. A lot of Native American Tribes are Matriarchies, which is how my own Dad was Raised, in a Matriarchal Tribe. And China's Mosuo People. All it means is usually that property is passed down thru the Female Line and they are the primary decision makers for the Family. It's how my Family is run and tho' that was VERY different than the staunch Religious based Culture The Man comes from, he soon saw how well it worked out for us as a Family Unit and now he's convinced it's preferable. He's a strong Man and that isn't diminished at all, in fact, it can compliment one another if you work off your individual strengths, being a Yin and Yang Team. And Auto Correcting you is sure some shit, built in to our Patriarchal System I suppose? *Bwahahaha*
DeleteCodex: The first sentence is well put. I didn't know about tribes being matriarchal, always saw male Chief's.
DeleteWell....if that's how software is programmed.
Years ago I spent a week as a translator/interpretor at a UN conference on women peasant farmers (who could feed the world, another story) and met indigenous women from all continents, especially impressive were the women from Juchitan matriarchy.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.second-congress-matriarchal-studies.com/bennholdtthomsen.html
This link is from another congress but more or less covers it.
We have no idea really how many ancient cultures were matriarchal or egalitarian because until recently archeologists were all male and patriarchal and filtered their discoveries through what religion and culture told them was the natural order of things, that being male dominance and superiority. We have no idea how many of the world's achievements were contributed by women since they have been erased from history or denied attribution for the last 5,000 years. Until recently historically it has been against the law for women to publish, get patents, etc for their work. How many paintings, music, scientific advancements, inventions were credited to husbands, fathers, brothers, sons, and more recently research partners and assistants? I read a book back in the 70s I think challenging the conventional wisdom that men were responsible for all the achievements that propelled us into civilization attributing things like agriculture, pottery, weaving, food preserving, etc to women. Does this make us smarter? Maybe, I don't know. What I want to know is why the patriarchy has feared women to the point that it represses them and makes them powerless. I wonder where humanity would be if it hadn't repressed half its brain power.
ReplyDeleteCodex: I wonder the same and mentioned it previously on your blog. All of the worst conquerors were male and destroyed ancient cultures. When I think of the loss of the library of Alexandria...
DeleteHow many famous painters stole ideas from women studying with them?
I think we'd be further, especially if women also use their inherent nurturing and remain women rather than this chest pounding approach.
P.S. society has accepted that men have a higher IQ. What if it's the other way around? Who says it isn't?
ReplyDeleteHere's another one. Saw this today. Alice H. Parker, invented a gas furnace with a duct system ie central heating. Not only a woman but a black woman.
ReplyDeleteAlso inventor of icicle Christmas lights, Kevlar, adhesive on post it notes...all women. There was a site that collects them. Can't find it.
DeleteCodex above.
Delete