He's Not as Smart as He Thinks

well i dont want to brag but sometimes i can outdo some men, like the article men have larger egos than abilities. I am a very independent woman, raised my four children alone, i can repair my home, car, do yard work, trim trees and yes even fix cars/trucks, and to find another man after my husband died is so very difficult cause none can do better than i can, and frustration sits in, and the i give up takes over- and as you can see i spell good oh and i fix computer too. :o)

This study wasn't taken to bash women over men, it wasn't even to try to show how much better men are than women. it was a simple study to tell us that men tend to say they have a higher IQ. which in the study proved to be true, not by much, but true still. It wasn't testing the willpower and encouragement of either gender. It has nothing to do with men vs. women.

wow, anyone who thinks this study is a waste of time is a chauvenist, (some of you guys probably don't know what the word means...cause you're so bright) if a study came out that could potentially improve the lives of men you would think it worthwhile, but when it could potentially improve the lives of women, you think its a waste of time,how cruel, primitive and inconsiderate of you all...as for the dude who commented that men have "done it all" ,as in made most of the achievements through history, that's probably because women were not allowed to!!! I mean seriously, go take a history class! Talk about proving the study right!!!

Our survival instinct makes us obey the role models presented to us in order to keep us acceptable to our social group. www.schematherapy.com

My idea of the problem stems from the truth that boys and girls ARE reared to be "different" people and that a growing number of current child bearing age parents are having babies not knowing how to traverse this world themselves. Thus sustaining ignorance and folly. Boys must be brash, hearty and inpregnable. Girls are to be understanding, quiet and pretty. Although I refuse to believe people are doing this purposefully, it is none the less one of many truths. As the author points out reguarding this issue... how do you fix a problem if I'm really just a stupid male who thinks they are wise and knowledgeable. Who takes my comment seriously now?

Wow, "boundtobond" so perfectly illustrates the finding in the research that men are more likely to be at the very bottom of the IQ curve. Maybe if he had been using his brain instead of watching football, grunting, scratching his genitals, perusing pornography, "pimping" out his car, neglecting his children, and obsessing about meathead athletes perhaps he would be perceived as marginally intelligent.

Men who want to be thought of as intelligent should not obsess about putting down women. Grow a pair!

"Posted By: boundtobond @ 01/25/2008 8:54:02 AM
Comment: Well, I imagine if women used their brains more and spent less time not using their brains -- mindless tasks -- their wouldn't be an argument. All that makeup, shaving, shopping, outfit coordinating, chatting with toddlers and obsessing with celebraties....hmmmm. Women who don't want to be treated as sexual objects should not obsess with being sexy. Come on girls."

Who funds studies like this? This may be the biggest waste of time and resources ever spent. What good can possibly come from this study?

Let's take all this effert and resources and concentrate them on something that may benefit the world...how about finding a revolutionary alternative energy source to oil.

YAY!
More ammo for the people that love to portray father figures and male role model as simple minded jackasses.

Well, I imagine if women used their brains more and spent less time not using their brains -- mindless tasks -- their wouldn't be an argument. All that makeup, shaving, shopping, outfit coordinating, chatting with toddlers and obsessing with celebraties....hmmmm. Women who don't want to be treated as sexual objects should not obsess with being sexy. Come on girls.

Opinion: due to expectations of most civilizations (NOT ALL) that women were caretakers of children and the agriculture/herbal tenders while the male physical strength was utilized for hunting larger game and war, it occurs to me that men had to develop a separate social culture and interpersonal relations communication that would emphasize the need to be 'confident', encourage 'boasting' (of the "big" catch) to enforce the perception (by others) of great strength. This 'strength' eventually became equated, physically or mentally as societal needs and roles changed. Women, on the other had, required the passivity roles as primary child tenders, as well as for tending to the herbal/medicinal/agricultural needs within the homes. The social structure of those 'left behind' during war or long hunts (including seafaring) --- had to change. For example, becoming fixed in an agricultural location, the fears of unity during natural disaster would be addressed. The need to understand unity through spirituality had to be addressed. Without brute physical strength, the teamwork development through encouraging strength amongst the crowd (rather than boasting of one's own, per se) needed to be developed (especially as child tenders). The constant worry of loss of the partner would bond in a much more humble and passive manner, as well as the obvious status of the lack of physical strength vs. that partner--- so the subjects of discussion would have to be about what the 'other' is capable of, rather than what 'she' can do personally. The results of organized religion over the last few millenia only emphasized these traits, eventually even placing the 'male' figure as the dominant in nearly all 'modern' faiths.
In my opinion, these are a few factors that eventually resulted in evolved traits over the last 8000 yrs or so, that bled in social perceptions. Thus, women would score higher on emotional intelligence, and women would be less likely to inflate their own abilities, while men were encouraged to inflate their abilities to 'find their rank' in societal positions. What I find interesting about the recent feminist movements of the last century is the publicity allowed for larger organized voices. However, in history, there was always the 'strong' and intelligent woman figure, in various queens, religious icons, wars (Matilda of Tuscany, Boadicea, etc.). In niche societies that are not as influenced by modern religion, the defined strong female may also be recognized for high intelligence (above others) and some still have reputations for being more cunning hunters than their male counterparts! ..... remember also, that some 'smart' women have found it advantageous to be extremely secretive about their abilities for the sake of being 'cunning'.... :-)

Opinion: due to expectations of most civilizations (NOT ALL) that women were caretakers of children and the agriculture/herbal tenders while the male physical strength was utilized for hunting larger game and war, it occurs to me that men had to develop a separate social culture and interpersonal relations communication that would emphasize the need to be 'confident', encourage 'boasting' (of the "big" catch) to enforce the perception (by others) of great strength. This 'strength' eventually became equated, physically or mentally as societal needs and roles changed. Women, on the other had, required the passivity roles as primary child tenders, as well as for tending to the herbal/medicinal/agricultural needs within the homes. The social structure of those 'left behind' during war or long hunts (including seafaring) --- had to change. For example, becoming fixed in an agricultural location, the fears of unity during natural disaster would be addressed. The need to understand unity through spirituality had to be addressed. Without brute physical strength, the teamwork development through encouraging strength amongst the crowd (rather than boasting of one's own, per se) needed to be developed (especially as child tenders). The constant worry of loss of the partner would bond in a much more humble and passive manner, as well as the obvious status of the lack of physical strength vs. that partner--- so the subjects of discussion would have to be about what the 'other' is capable of, rather than what 'she' can do personally. The results of organized religion over the last few millenia only emphasized these traits, eventually even placing the 'male' figure as the dominant in nearly all 'modern' faiths.
In my opinion, these are a few factors that eventually resulted in evolved traits over the last 8000 yrs or so, that bled in social perceptions. Thus, women would score higher on emotional intelligence, and women would be less likely to inflate their own abilities, while men were encouraged to inflate their abilities to 'find their rank' in societal positions. What I find interesting about the recent feminist movements of the last century is the publicity allowed for larger organized voices. However, in history, there was always the 'strong' and intelligent woman figure, in various queens, religious icons, wars (Matilda of Tuscany, Boadicea, etc.). In niche societies that are not as influenced by modern religion, the defined strong female may also be recognized for high intelligence (above others) and some still have reputations for being more cunning hunters than their male counterparts!

For every man and woman who has rendered Feminist studies useless; this is concrete evidence that much more gender studies needs to be done. Our perceptions of men and women are carried accross the world. This study combines both statistics and psychology, demonstrating how women get raised/ treated/ or are perceived internationally, regardless of race and origin. - So whomever posted the comment that white men are discriminated against the most, should see what race Larry Summers from Harvard is (dumbass)

I think that the editor of this article is bleeding through the wound. Seem to me that she had a bad experience related to this subject.

For every man, who thinks that Feminist studies is in ways stupid or have rendered it usless; this is concrete evidence, connecting statistics and psychology, that our world imputes ideas on both men and women, and women still end up on the bottom.