Are Women Smarter than Men?

[@memeabledata]

Support the channel and check out www.odoo.com/r/v0c to create your website for free!

[@superpowerdragon]

i dare you to do cognitive differences between ethnicities, if you do ill immediately subscribe

[@Semispace]

@@superpowerdragon I think that one's a little too spicy for youtube

[@just_mdd4]

@@superpowerdragon 🌚

[@hoogyoutube]

That explains why I'm still single. I'm just clearly too smart for women

[@vVearon]

Crazy that the video predicted your comment

[@Simple-EDU]

@@vVearon he just said it

[@blazer9547]

Go get married and have kids you dork. We need more children for Europe

[@enderyu]

As a high-value male who can't get laid, I can confirm women are not smart

[@distendedmist5840]

bruh are you two the same guy?

[@gigiduru125]

wordcel vs shape rotator

[@davidmella1174]

shape enjoyers be like

[@OMNI-Infinity]

Excel speedrunners vs GD lobotomy rot

[@RedOneM]

Wow, I really could have saved 18 minutes, how did I not find this comment earlier?

[@ojin2763]

who up rotating their shape rn?

[@Z_S_S_K]

bruh i got a ad in the middle of remembering the cubes

[@memeabledata]

Thank you for letting me know! I'll see if I can fix that

[@Z_S_S_K]

@@memeabledata i just checked and you fixed it, thanks!!

[@SierNotsruht]

ad blocker buddy

[@deleted_handle]

​@@SierNotsruht 🤓

[@bennemann]

I have no idea how you're possibly able to bear using KZbin without also using an adblocker.

[@DefaultFlame]

I hate that science and medicine has become political. Men and women are different. People of different races have different reactions to different diseases, like sickle cell disease. This shouldn't be controversial, but certain anti-science ideologies have made it so.

[@GoodSirEvil]

My friend, if you care about science, refrain from using the word race. That's not a biological term. It was made up by racists in the olden days to claim they are superior to those from different cultures than them. Or those who look different. Race doesn't exist. That's not an agenda. That's not an ideology. That's not whitewashing. Its fact. Race is a myth. All humans are the same species. We just have different genetics. But that counts for every single human being on earth. Anyway. Have a good day my man. Please just be careful with what you unknowingly support.

[@givikap120]

well, it looks like you're specifically have in mind left here but I have to remind you that usually right are the ones that are contradicting with science as conservative view lead to using stereotypes "women are stoopid" instead facts tho I won't deny that thru the last years amount of anti-science coping on the left increased significantly too

[@gudetamaminiso513]

The good thing is that this video explains that in sciences men and women perform equally !

[@CoalOres]

My default hypothesis would be the opposite. Why would evolution produce two completely separate neural architectures? You'd need to waste half the genome responsible. The only reason sex evolved in the first place was to mix genetics, it makes no sense from an efficiency perspective to evolve anything beyond service of that goal.

[@DefaultFlame]

@@CoalOres . . . Don't take this the wrong way, but you very, very clearly know next to nothing about how genetics/DNA, biology, fetal development, evolution, or the scientific process work. Please watch a few youtube videos on the subjects, because explaining everything wrong with what you just wrote would take way too much text and effort for a youtube comment. But I will try give a very short summary: Fetal development doesn't work the way you think, genetics don't work the way you think, evolution doesn't work the way you think, hypothesis formulation doesn't work the way you think, and lastly "different" doesn't have to mean "utterly different in every way," in this case it means "different in clearly observable and documented ways." Please watch some videos on the subject explaining what DNA actually does, gene expression and activation, how DNA affects fetal development, the process of fetal development, evolution (don't watch a dumbed down video on it, because they perpetuate a lot of simplified but incorrect ideas about how evolution works, pick one or even a series that goes into depth), and how to formulate a hypothesis. Please. (Yes, all of this WAS the very short version.)

[@ozAqVvhhNue]

I can count the number of youtube videos I have liked with my two hands. This is now one of them. One of the best and most balanced overviews about such a delicate topic. Respect :)

[@memeabledata]

Thank you!

[@tanushjain7679]

so less than 1024 videos?

[@cai0]

He means he's lost count of how many videos he liked with a single hand.

[@avivastudios2311]

If we know that there's a slight difference between girls and boys we can use that information to help both sexes do better in school. Not to be political but to be kind.

[@rosameltrozo5889]

Thing is if you help both the gap still remains

[@JackWabbitTV]

Yes, that's the ultimate fail of the progressivist movement here. By acknowledging that there are these sex differences we can better help both men and women to be better learners. Acting as if we're all the same is just going to lead to inequality.

[@bucherregaldomi9084]

@@JackWabbitTV My guy that just shows that you don't even know what progressivism means. It would seem as though you have never read up on progressive theory. And I'm not even progressive. No properly progressive view states that "there are *no* sex differences", nor that "Acting as if we're all the same". That's just an old straw-man of progressive thinking spewed by people who don't even know what they are talking about. If you made it to this point, the progressive position is about constitutional rights, i.e., that men and women are equal UNDER THE LAW. That's it, not this assertion that somehow progressivism tries to portray a biological theory of equality, that's just the straw-man of the ignoramus to easily go against progressivism without even understanding it. Say that men were inferior to women in every way, should this mean that men get less rights? The progressive position is that no, even if that were the case, we are all in this together, so the vote of the ignoramus should count as much as the vote of the rich and powerful. I don't think that ethically progressivism is always right, but even if I opposed I wouldn't try to say that it says things that it doesn't say.

[@bucherregaldomi9084]

@@JackWabbitTV and before you tell me about policy, I know that. It doesn't change anything. Policy is not a biological theory, policy is just a mechanism of the State to enact their will. No policy is ever a biological theory of equality, policy is just a way to try to achieve a set of goals. We might say the goals are wrong, but that doesn't mean that they are equating themselves to some biological theory of any sort. In fact policy is better tested in the realm of statistics and economics, rather than biology so.

[@qirmi2030]

@@bucherregaldomi9084 aside from Basic rights. Any extra rights should be attributed to merit, be it male or female. Total Meritocracy!!!

[@Johnny_Savage]

the STEM paradox seems obvious to me... in order to go through a STEM degree you need to be highly motivated otherwise you won't complete it. in more developed and more egalitarian countries women have enough freedom, and a safety net large enough, that those things de-incentivize them to make money, and on top of that they know that even if they won't make money it won't damage that much their mating prospects. while on the other hand men, whether they live in a developed country or not, are always incentivized to make money because it increases their attractiveness to women. men have their passions just like women, but (unless they absolutely excel in them since a very young age) they deliberately choose to follow more practical paths as they're inherently more motivated to do so.

[@mattshaman668]

Others would know more about this but couldn't the explanation be in the Quran? I know aspects of the Muslim faith promote education for all and that women in a lot of Muslim majority countries tend to be highly educated, often more highly educated than men. It's a pretty solid common denominator for the countries on the low equality/many women in STEM part of the graph. Ntm a bunch of them would study heaps with the absence of a more solid career to chase.

[@Johnny_Savage]

@@mattshaman668 no, it was the same in the european countries of the eastern block. women there used to graduate from engineering and physics as much as men. after those countries became liberal democracies, the gap started to become larger and larger

[@DefaultFlame]

Yup. That's not even touching on men and women, in statistically significant numbers, are interested in different things. Some of it is cultural influence, but some of it is cross-cultural and seems to be biological.

[@vanleeuwenhoek]

(edited)

[@DefaultFlame]

@@vanleeuwenhoek And?

[@mattb925]

Where I'm from (Italy) the stereotype was always inverted in math, and in general in school. Girls were always better, and not just a little bit, but by A LOT. Really weird for me seeing people saying the opposite

[@west3783]

Perché gli insegnanti fanno un botto di favoritismi

[@mattb925]

​@@west3783 mah non saprei, devo dire che a me di sicuro non aiutavano quasi mai, però noi maschi in generale eravamo sempre più caproni, in tutti i sensi 😂

[@spliter88]

Was raised in portugal and the same stereotypes is there (though in my class top 2 of the math studends were boys). It could be due to the fact that in school most of the teachers are women which encourages girls to study harder, (incidentally in universities most of the teachers are men which encourages boys to study harder)

[@OlegSokolovsky]

I know a research that shows that Italian teachers actually do discriminate boys and give them worse marks than girls. Also on objective tests for math like pisa Italian boys outperform Italian girls the most in the world

[@tinotales]

Read somewhere it says "Girls tend to do better at low level math than boys. However, that changes at high level math."

[@daskalospapas1883]

The storm is coming Forget your respectful discussion

[@saftheartist6137]

😂🤣

[@DefaultFlame]

Raise the sails and man the cannons!

[@sad_man_no_talent]

@@DefaultFlame I I captain

[@evgeniyevgeniy8352]

Women have choice between family and career. Men don't have: men must go career because it's (almost) impossible for a man to find a woman who will provide him. Because of that all men go career and do better results just because in career is much more men that women. If you want equality, you should support men who want to take care of children. And thats the reason of "gender paradox" - if you support women who already have more choice, you will never have equality.

[@zwiebelface185]

Men and women are not equal in terms of relationships and trying to force it anyways will only cause harm. Let people decide for themselves what they want to do as long as they're not exploiting or harming others.

[@givikap120]

even tho I support this equality on this regard - women will never be providing into the family as much as men on average because girls grow, mature and age faster than boys biologically (aka girls can start and end reproduction age earlier) this mean that girls will always be pressured into the "you're 20, you are desired by any men, but if you will waste your time - nobody will marry you because you're too old"

[@akoskocsis6853]

Phrasing is important: "Support men who want to take care of children" should be "Be willing to marry, live with, pay for and sleep with a man who works less"

[@vVearon]

That sponsorship transition was so smooth

[@dalinplaisier6791]

Just let people compete freely, we do not need to hold their hand and encourage them to go after the opposite of what is the “stereotype”. As you can see, trying to put an emphasis on “equality” doesn’t give the expected results, it just puts people into a victim mindset and prevents them from doing what truly fits them.

[@ethanisnotsleeping]

So, if studies can show one gender has better test scores in X subject and learns better via X type of instruction while the other gender is better at learning via Y method, then shouldn't the conversation be more about how can we teach better to the abilities of the genders, rather than who is smarter? Besides, if we do want to argue who is smarter, it's kind of hard to discuss the results when they're limited by gaps in our instructional methods. Not everyone is getting a fair shot.

[@pace1195]

One quick point on the last chart of the video. Genetics may not change that fast, but societal norms can. More women could also be graduating with a biology degree because more women are graduating period. Fifty years ago, men were graduating at a rate of 60% vs. 40% for women. These days, those numbers have flipped, and women are now getting graduate degrees at a nearly <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="121">2:1</a> rate over men. You need to compare the increase in biology degrees against the increase in graduation rates, not genetics.

[@woodykusaki9970]

That's because women get help from all these feminist organization. Women are also better at memorization which is typically the school exams. Men tend to be better at explaining the why's and the how's.

[@CijjJodaij]

@@woodykusaki9970Are these feminist organizations writing tests or are you maybe conflating a few things.

[@qirmi2030]

degrees are a scam.

[@woodykusaki9970]

@@CijjJodaij What? Do you understand how things work?

[@rodrigoapaza8086]

THIS COMENT MUST BE PINNED, it brings important factors to analize

[@kaladin8997]

In 78% of all psychological variables women and men do not differ, and the differences within members of one gender are way greater than the differences between genders. Gender generally seems to be an unsignificant predictor for most variables, which is why the emphasis put on it is way overdone. (And this is not even considering that this men-women differential viewpoint tends to exclude non-binary approaches). Memeable Date as always very (scientifically) based, need more yt vids like this.

[@yourcrazybear]

Sure. The smartest men however is smarter than the smartest women.

[@kaladin8997]

Whether that may be true or not, there is still no justification to look so overwhelmingly at intelligence difference from a binary gender perspective, as other factors (class, education. social location) deserve way more emphasis and attention in my opinion.

[@anonymousman4419]

Men tend to display a greater variance when it comes to physical attributes (e.g physical strength and intelligence). That is why there are more elite men than there are elite women. Furthermore, the men have a greater mean than that of the women when it comes to intelligence. In reality though, the mean is useless and the extremes are what define the world. I do not belive that the Y chromosome is the _cause_ behind the difference of intelligence distribution between men and women. Men struggle to reproduce if they're mediocre, women don't. This has the potential to change but I don't think it will any time soon.

[@helix5779]

Cope​@@kaladin8997

[@lunium5]

Your statement is contradictory and objectively untrue. The differences within members of one gender cannot be greater than the differences between genders because the differences between genders are additive to the differences within members of one gender. If you take two people of the same gender that are polar opposites, by making them different genders, you add an extra 22% of psychological variance (using your numbers). Gender is not, and does not seem to be, an insignificant predictor for most variables: It is the number one determinant of why men and women end up in diffrent fields of occupation.

[@SamuelHill-qt4zx]

I think we really need to start accepting that men and women are different biologically, and that does include mentally. Evolutionary speaking, it just makes sense for men and women to be born with a greater ability in some mental fields due to the traditional gender roles we had way back in our history. I don't know why society is so hesitant to touch gender differences.

[@merrymachiavelli2041]

It's also worth noting that you see behavioural differences differences between sexes amongst all great ape species, and most mammals generally. If humans truly have no or insignificant behavioural or cognitive predispositions as a matter of sex, we'd be pretty weird. You'd expect some even if purely as a matter of evolutionary hang-over.

[@exesexesexesexesexesex]

Fr its just basic evolution. And they say gender is a social construct. Ofc it was based around the biological differences otherwise women couldve just taken over?

[@deinauge7894]

but still, you can't just assume that a specific difference is for real. Be scientific, look for evidence, and (most important point) always question yourself. Evidence is not proof ;-)

[@dh510]

Fact is that, concerning intelligence, there is more variation in males than in females, which results in most geniuses as well as most people who are complete failures being male. A logical theory for this is that since the females of any species are the limiting factor regarding reproduction, evolution discourages larger variations in female brains, because complete failures, bearing a higher likeliness of a premature passing before being able to reproduce or of the inability to take care of offspring, might pose a serious risk to the survivability of a population as a whole by introducing a unnecessary bottleneck. For the very same reason, women are more risk averse and less inclined to be violent, they don't even have the body composition to be very effective at the latter. Because taking risks and getting into fights is what gets you killed, and getting yourself killed while being the sex which can't be replaced as easily is a bad idea from an evolutionary standpoint.

[@gudetamaminiso513]

That could be an explaination although it is just an opinion with which i totally disagree. A lot of male failures has to do with being eliminated by other men (indirectly in current societies) and girls are much more likely prevented from (and repressed if it happens) fighting each other in the playground while this type of skirmish is almost considered as a rite of passage for boys, so their are offered the possibility to express violence physically (education is a strong factor in this respect).

[@astra1360]

@@gudetamaminiso513 the underlying logic of this comment this is actually not just an opinion but a rather well studied phenomenon called the male variability hypothesis which very much is reflected in many different species.

[@gudetamaminiso513]

@@astra1360 The variation in intelligence is indeed mentioned in the video. The given reason for that in the comment is an opinion :)

[@user-dXNlcm5hbWU]

@gudetamaminiso513 You missed the point. The fact that greater male variability is reflected across species and across attributes (including in things like height etc) shows that it is almost certainly not a societally driven phenomenon, but has to do with evolutionary pressures.

[@gudetamaminiso513]

​@@user-dXNlcm5hbWU Intelligence variability has clearly never been measured among other species. Your dreaming in your already-made wrong opinions. By the way, as mentioned in the video, the biological evolution and the environment are intertwined.

[@freesk8]

The answer to the question of is it nature or nurture is almost always "both."

[@lonestarr1490]

I think everyone agrees on that. The question is, "to what degree?" Also, what's with those little magnifying glasses in YT comments as of late? Makes it really hard to click on comments without being redirected to wherever it's trying to send me.

[@watcheronly71]

​@@lonestarr1490 in hasset et al study male monkeys prefer wheeled toys and female monkeys prefer plush toys so it means nature plays bigger role than nurture. Afterall, stereotypes derives from nature.

[@rosameltrozo5889]

True, but almost always more nature. The brain is an organ like any other, not some blank chip ready to be corrupted by the patriarchal virus as Janet thinks

[@Noname-67]

It's not even that, the question is ill posed. Nature dictates how one respond to nurture. For example, if you feed a horse different amounts of grass over a long period of time, its weight would vary based on the amount of grass, the nurture part, but how it varied by nurture depends on the nature of the horse, and the fact that nurture has any relevant at all is a part of nature. If you do the same for a tiger, the result is that it would be dead, that's the nature of a tiger. The more well posed question would be how and how much does nurture affect a certain trait. When the answer is not much, this would corresponds to 'nature' of the naive question. I don't think there's any instance where the answer of the naive question is 'nurture' really. The weight of a horse surely depends on nurture, but you aren't getting a 5 mg horse no matter how little you feed.

[@merrymachiavelli2041]

While I agree, it's worth noting that the 'side' that tends to argue it's always one or the other is generally the nurture-side, driven by people with a profound ideological incentive for humans to be blank-slates. You very rarely get scientists arguing everything is entirely nature (except obviously for specific genetic diseases, although even then they'll normally emphasise treatment options.). This leads to a situation where, at least from my POV, I'm always seeing a biologists and more science-based articles arguing that 'hey, this is more a matter of genetic disposition than commonly acknowledged' whereas humanities/pop-science are arguing that genetics as no or marginal effect. The straw-man of the 19th century eugenicist or anti-suffrage campaigner arguing that everything is nature hasn't been a relevant force in science in decades, yet is still resurrected to make things seem more 'both-sides-y' than they actually are.

[@russellchido]

That sponsor transition was hilarious 😂

[@cheesebusiness]

This video is banned in Muslim countries

[@NoolpVun]

Кроме Израиля (где 1.5 миллиона мусульман)🙂

[@fatconnor7284]

@@NoolpVun He's obviously referring to Muslim controlled countries that base their laws on their interpretation of Islam. Israel doesn't fit that bill.

[@whitepony-f9w]

not here apparently. im from a muslim country

[@fabovondestory]

Wow, managed not just to be sexist but also racist. Damn

[@NoolpVun]

@@fatconnor7284 очевидно 💯

[@amanofnoreputation2164]

Despite all of this, the differences are small enough that experts cannot reliably distinguish female brains from males brains based on the physical structure of the brains in question I.E even if a region is consistently more developed in one sex, there is so much overlap that the other could still very easily eclispe the average by a wide margin in that region.

[@KanadMondal]

That explains why I play Tetris, I'm just clearly too smart for crosswords.

[@jessecuster42]

too many single mothers to be true

[@RedSoo749]

goated with the sauce you are always banger and well sourced synthesis with cool visuals

[@allen_tor]

I am a man I got 24 words in sixty seconds. And I was right about all the ones where men do better and remembered the sequence that the squares lit up

[@lame6810]

In Norway, 3 of out 5 university students are women

[@bartdejaeger]

How about making a video about why Sub-Saharan Africans consistently score far lower on IQ-tests than South-East Asians that come from similar socio-economic households? To what degree are those differences likely to be genetic?

[@Drawperfectcircles]

It’s not similar socio-economic households when different cultures just happen to live near the equator. The way of life is just different, so is the kind of opportunities any individual may have. Art is not a very viable option in most of Africa, while Art is a very viable option in Southeast Asia(manga, animation, illustrations). The same is with education and history. Socio-economically, They’re to far apart to even compare.

[@bartdejaeger]

​@@Drawperfectcircles I wasn’t referring to these ethnicities in their countries of origin. I meant the discrepancy observed between these two ethnic groups when they move to other countries, even while living in similar areas. This Sub-Saharan African-Asian gap is measurable in any country or area they move to, even in third-generation descendants.

[@Spyblox007]

@@bartdejaeger the way your question is worded is way too vague for a subject this controversial. Please cite the data you are referencing, as I don't trust your summary of it. That being said, it is unlikely that different ethnicities evolved different levels of intellect. It's generally agreed that any differences are environmental, which includes socioeconomic factors. Culture and external treatment have always been factors and do not disappear just because you are 2nd or 3rd generation. Knowledge is passed down through generations of parents imparting it on their kids. If knowledge is missing, then someone starts off behind. Hence why IQ tests are not a good indicator of who is intelligent, but of who managed to collect the right knowledge to score high.

[@lonestarr1490]

Based on 37 years of personal experience, I totally believe the Greater Male Variability Hypothesis. The smartest people I met in my life were predominantly male with some exceptions (I have a PhD in mathematics, so I attended a bunch of conferences over the years and met what can only be called a shitload of extremely intelligent people, male and female). But the greatest buffoons I met where all male with only a single exception: my former landlady.

[@DefaultFlame]

That's obvious if you look at mating dynamics over evolutionary time. In humans, as in most mammals, males compete for breeding rights, while females are what they compete over. This means that almost all females that live to a breeding age in a generation will pass on their genes, while only a subset of males will. Genetic analysis has shown that only about 60% of men have passed on their genes, while close to 100% of women have. This increases the rate of change in men due to selection and stabilizes genetic diversity in women.

[@CijjJodaij]

That’s just survivorship bias. You can’t just draw the conclusion that the playing field was level and let to the outcome you observed. There’s too many variables along the way to a PhD and into a certain scientific field.

[@CijjJodaij]

@@DefaultFlame Get out of here with your unscientific social-evolutionary mumbo jumbo. I‘m too old for this BS to fly.

[@DefaultFlame]

@@CijjJodaij Ah yes, because simple mathematics and evolution are "unscientific."

[@lonestarr1490]

@@DefaultFlame You are being unscientific here. Because what you omit completely is that in humans - in stark contrast to any other species I'm aware of - males also do their fair share of selection. We do not find all females equally attractive, after all. Far from it. And that's just the first flaw in your argument. Another one is that it remains completely unclear how this is even supposed to link back to intelligence. Are you suggesting that girls inherit their mental capacity from their mother while boys get it from their father? Or how else are your (alleged) distributions of passing on genes supposed to explain the observed discrepancies?

[@dungeonmaster217]

I'm am a male and I struggled with the first puzzle, but when the second task appeared I also struggled. fml

[@zenoomorph]

you are just cooked :(

[@felixmoore6781]

If you have neither a male brain nor a female one, do you have any brain at all? 🤔

[@costasstatho7749]

me two bro

[@watcheronly71]

I struggled with paper one but I guessed first question correct

[@Littlevampiregirl100]

im a woman and i did well on the male ones, but the female one with memorizing sequence i could not even remember where the second number was and went completely wrong from there lol there is a site for girls that has a notorious puzzle game. you have to match minimum two identical bubbles, and you can only match identical bubbles currently aligning. if there are any bubbles left its gameover. the grid is 11x12 and there are four bubble types. the bubbles move to the right of the grid, but only if their vertical line has been cleared completely the game has split the demographic of the girl site completely. one half is extremely good at the game and can seemingly do it based on gut feelings alone. the other half struggles even if they try to calculate ahead and try to play as smart as possible. some have never gotten past level 1. average score is 7-12, a few have consistent daily high scores of level 30-35. and a few are inbetween who can do well enough through luck or trying hard, but mostly avoid the game because of the focus it takes for them for too little reward in return. i graduated to one of the mid tiers, for a while, but most of the time i cant figure the process out even if i wanted to. tutorials and tips barely help if at all. i have to soak in so much information and pause to think about them, disrupting the flow and adding fatigue /watch?v=8husyljWVXQ

[@wallie963]

That sponsor plug was slick as hell

[@Bridge2110]

It may not be all about brain size, but brain size and IQ do correlate at around 0.3 iirc. Stereotype threat is bunk science that really only shows up in the lab, and fails to replicate. It is not a good explanation for why girls are not in STEM. Neither is discrimination, as girls are given a <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="121">2:1</a> hiring advantage into STEM fields or, to quote a study about what discrimination we are going to see: "Although two-thirds of academics supported no bias, for every 1 academic who supported discrimination in favour of men, 11 supported discrimination in favour of women. Our results were consistent with the hypothesis that academics and journal editors are biased in favour of women, rather than against women." In other words, the discrimination is actually in favour of women, but we still see these disparities due to their choices. Working fewer hours due to increased family obligations is one way of putting it, but so is pointing out that women choose to work fewer hours. As for stereotypes explaining the difference because it is stronger in more gender-equal countries, that's clearly backwards causation... As for g supposedly not differing, this is a based on bad research practices. A lot of research is done on young teens, which is when girls have a developmental advantage. Furthermore, look into the development of IQ tests, where it is admitted that they were created to minimize sex differences. Even then though, when done on adults, we do see sex differences favouring men of about 3 or 4 points. I will quote a few papers: “We conclude that while the magnitude of the male-female difference in g is not large, it is real and non-trivial.” And “1027 boys and 924 girls between 12 and 18 years were tested. The general trend shows that girls do better at the younger ages and their performance declines relative to boys among older age groups, which supports the developmental theory. The sex difference for the DAT as a whole for 18 year olds is a 4.3 IQ advantage for boys, very close to the advantage that can be predicted from their larger brain size (4.4 IQ points).” And “A meta‐analysis is presented of 22 studies of sex differences in university students of means and variances on the Progressive Matrices. The results disconfirm the frequent assertion that there is no sex difference in the mean but that males have greater variability. To the contrary, the results showed that males obtained a higher mean than females by between .22d and .33d, the equivalent of 3.3 and 5.0 IQ conventional points, respectively.” We also see huge differences in personality: "We found a global effect size D = 2.71, corresponding to an overlap of only 10% between the male and female distributions. Even excluding the factor showing the largest univariate ES, the global effect size was D = 1.71 (24% overlap). These are extremely large differences by psychological standards.", further explaining the differences we see in terms of participation in STEM fields.

[@zwiebelface185]

Women don't need money as much as men do in life which is why they don't go into STEM, especially in rich countries with a strong welfare system. 4 IQ points of difference on average is not significant in that regard since you don't need to have that high of an IQ to go into STEM.

[@JamesJohnson-iq5wb]

It's interesting that she brings up that environmental differences can be disproven by teaching kids in a classroom setting producing even results. That seems flawed because now you are measuring their ability to learn in a classroom environment which generally does not favor men and I could see producing an even result even if innate differences exist that result from divergent ecologies between genders. The moment you introduce learning into spatial reasoning, you are no longer measuring spatial reasoning but rather the ability to learn in a classroom setting.

[@CijjJodaij]

I think what she meant is, that the tests itself are flawed and can be specifically prepared for in a way that produces pretty equal results across genders.

[@JamesJohnson-iq5wb]

@@CijjJodaij Well yeah, that's just cancelling out a genetic bias with an environmental bias. It doesn't disprove that there is a strong genetic influence. For exampe, take those birds that identify objects and put them against me. If you teach those birds for a while they'll probably be about as good as I am but they're genetically going to be worse than I am. Obviously a bit of an absurd example that greatly exaggerates the gap but it provides an example of how teaching can close a gap even when strong genetic differences exist.

[@JamesJohnson-iq5wb]

@@CijjJodaij I should further clarify. Just because a bias can be cancelled out by environmental doesn't mean there isn't a biological component. If you malnourish someone with genes to grow to 5'10 under ideal conditions, they might only real 5'7 but if you feed someone with genes to grow to 5'7 they'll reach 5'7. That doesn't disprove that there is a genetic component just that a genetic advantage can be cancelled out by environmental factors when a genetic does exist.

[@exesexesexesexesexesex]

I dont understand why she is trying to dismiss genetic differences when they are the key thing here. Most stereotypes are based on literal biology I dont understand how could they think that society just made things up without a reason

[@afterthesmash]

How did she control for the most gifted boys tuning out the classroom environment and barely making the least effort to participate equally? Since I had the masculine trait of not caring much about my teacher's approval, I was tuned out 95% of the time. Usually I was challenging myself to come up with a less stupid version of the stupid thing on today's menu. Almost everything taught in the school setting is dumbed down. I was only ever concerned about my performance after I removed the dumb part. This was rarely on the test, no matter how the test was constructed/manipulated. I'm personally convinced that childhood aptitude in mathematics has no robust central tendency. The entire classroom construct depends upon central tendency. By age nine, it would have taken all of half an hour to teach me how to multiply 4x4 matrices of complex numbers. Some dumb thing? Not at all. Those are gamma matrices, arising out of Dirac's spinors, and are fundamental to understanding electromagnetism at a deep level. Me at age nine: COOL! The entire idea of a "test result" for the classroom as a whole depends upon this fiction of central tendency. Central tendency of aptitude seems to be more robust in the portion of human cognition which most resembles what our chatbots have recently become so good at: associational connection. Central tendency of aptitude does not strike me as robust in the portion of human cognition that our chatbots are failing at miserably: arithmetic, geometry, spatial reasoning, and higher mathematical abstractions. By the fiction of central tendency, I mean that there was no principled way to average my competence in mathematics into the classroom that claimed me (this was always a one-way street). Nassim Taleb addresses another industry that began to worship the false god of central tendency beyond what could be justified by principle. As a result, the market crash of 2008 brought to you by high finance, in thrall to an unjustified fiction of central tendency over geopolitical risk factors. LTCM was also brought down by the same fallacy, that you could decorrelate risk across all scales. Turned out, decorrelating the market impact of the fall of the Berlin Wall was not so easily accomplished in the real world. Likewise, correlating the market impact of the rise of the Trump Wall is not so easily accomplished in the real world. Asimov: The Mule is described as having a distinctive and somewhat grotesque appearance. He's tall and thin, with long limbs and a hunched posture. This physical oddity contributes to his sense of isolation and his desire to control others. Reality: The Mule is described as having a distinctively weird hair. He's tall and tubby, with short fingers, small hands and an erect, pugnacious posture, almost at times devolving into caricature of blue-collar superciliousness, despite his billionaire status. His mental oddity contributes to his sense of insulation and his desire to mock and control others. Concerning the extreme tails, Asimov was so right, and yet simultaneously, so wrong. That is, indeed, the nature of extreme tails.

[@virdrae]

C and 15 answers. I just guess we trans women are superior :P ... Or it is because I did competitive math and am a writer and avid reader. Who knows?

[@rodrigoapaza8086]

are trans women males or females??

[@cai0]

It's crazy how a 2yo channel with 11 videos can have this level of quality. Impressive.

[@yeahsureb]

I'm sorry but I refuse to respect your trend line at <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="881">14:41</a>. With a data spread that much you can basically draw a line anywhere you want.

[@szilagyimiklos4757]

The algorithm didnt like this one😅

[@dogyX3]

I'm from the algorithm

[@Atom224]

Because it questions the current political movement.

[@mirai9562]

As a man I did super bad on the visual spatial but better on the verbal and reading tasks by a long shot.

[@chrono4998]

i'm a woman and for me it was the opposite

[@monkeybrain2]

its only about averages, not absolutes

[@droidcelestial]

that odoo ad transition was wild TT

[@laurenzwicke1120]

the biggest g factor goes to the the creator behind this channel for adding so many adds, hes probably rich now

[@truecomedy5565]

Wow you got Hyde for your video? Wild, we had her theory in our lecture :D

[@rosameltrozo5889]

So sorry for you

[@rosameltrozo5889]

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="409">6:49</a> I wonder if this group knows evolution and other animals. Evolution would obviously reward behaviors that are conductive to reproduction and we see that in animals all the time, how do they explain gender behavioral differences in animals?

[@rosameltrozo5889]

Of ourse she's a gender studies professor, much more a ideological political position than science, then we have the real scientist

[@ExiMaster]

why would you make the title this?

[@JadecoreX3]

It is a thing that for example newspaper do quite often. If the title is provocative, yet a question, it can always be answered as "no", without needing to read the article

[@stechuskaktus8318]

@@JadecoreX3 Very true. What I don't like is the trend of article headlines which are not questions, just blatantly false in the way any normal person would understand them, yet technically correct in a very specific, niche context that noone cares about.

[@lonestarr1490]

​@@stechuskaktus8318 So "false by prevalent association"?

[@gryphonschnitzel7140]

The study showing that the association of math to men is stronger in gender equal countries has the same reason the gender-equality paradox. it just is in line with the trend that as you reduce societal factors, the biological factors express themselves more

[@Zharath]

Best video on YT I've seen this year. Also love the cleverly chosen title!

[@ckq]

Not gonna lie. I feel dumber now at 21 than when I was in peak mental shape from 13 to 19. I blame COVID, ChatGPT, my laziness and addiction to social media for exasperating my ADHD/autism symptoms (can't focus, bad communication)

[@WayOfTheZombie]

Since I got covid I would say my body and mind was changed. I'm more tarded now

[@diandradeeke]

my answers to the second question: asymptotical, asymbiotic, antiseptic, antibacterial, antidepressants, aliteral, asexual, anti-..., a..., ...

[@feynstein1004]

That's smart 😃

[@DisplayLine6.13.9]

atom alphabet Alabama Argentina America adderal aquarell additive amulet amputate aroma axe add a an and among almond ass

[@valentynvorobec7834]

anal

[@rodrigoapaza8086]

hahahahahaha, you must be a doctor or nurse (cant hide it :D)

[@Hollowdude15]

Nice video Memeable Data :]

[@salasart]

The title "Are Women Smarter than Men?" is clickbaity. But the video was fair and solid. Good video overall :)

[@cheesesentience]

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="50">0:50</a> nice YT recommendations; Kurzgesagt, Business Insider, Veritasium, Curious Archive, your own channel (of course)

[@Alienn-o_o]

+Vsauce

[@Baneb1984]

Very quality video, it's thought provoking and conscious of the implications. Well done!

[@darkspeed62]

This video as a whole is somewhat inconclusive. While it has a clickbait title, all of the analysis is sort of moot because we know that the cognitive abilities of both men and women differ in some areas and those areas are of a difference to understand why men and women are different. I think Jordan Peterson historically addressed this topic the best, by highlighting that the average difference between men and women isn't big (as the data in this video points out), but the a lot of the differences take place on the extremes. So, while women on average happen to be better at interacting with people: <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="748">12:28</a>, if you want the best people who are good at interacting with people they're all going to be women. Jordan Peterson uses aggression to explain why the prison system is dominated by men because the most aggressive people are almost always men.

[@Irondragon1945]

Amazing channel.

[@neoflyboy]

There is something smart called pyramid style of communication, where you put the conclusion first, then expand, then expand and so on. That's smart too

[@cheesebusiness]

Barbara Minto principle

[@ninjakiwigames5418]

Not me first thinking it was C and then "correcting" it to D 💀💀

[@lonestarr1490]

The first one with the blocky thing? I immediately answered A and since it was said there's only one correct answer, didn't even look at the other options. Turns out I overlooked one block at the upper end of the thingy, lol.

[@feynstein1004]

This is my own notion but I think the reason there's so much variability in men vs women is because men are less likely to survive than women and thus can, evolutionarily speaking, afford to try new things. Even at the genetic level, women's DNA is 23 sets of identical chromosomes whereas mean have the asymmetrical Y chromosome. Idk if this has any consequences for later development but I feel like it does. Men are also in general more susceptible to sexual selection than women because if you're a woman, you're basically guaranteed to reproduce and pass on your genes but the same is not true for men. All of this should contribute to men mutating faster than women at the genetic level, which would explain the increased variability.

[@Fasdfe]

It's so funny when non stem people talk that is bad for women that there is little women in stem. They really dont know how much dedicating, exhausting and depressing stem fields are. Bcs of it there is money after them. If inteligent woman dont need to go to stem studies to have good money it's woman privelage not discrimination. Men will always go to stem bcs of social pressure to be money provider and problem solver which all stem is about.

[@fabovondestory]

Thats the point. Why us it that way and how can we change it

[@therudrangshub]

People who always emphasis to fight "stereotype" or "glass ceiling" aren't the one who are actually on the side of solving real world problems. On contrary they are more interested in making money and fame in the journey.

[@monkeybrain2]

I dont know about that. I just staded studying mathematics and every single person i talked to was in it for the sake of math and not money

[@seanrodgers1839]

It's a fantasy that all people are the same. Her reasoning is, I hate say it, and for lack of will to type a lot, women's logic. Evidence that people are different is all around, an amazing amount _is_ environmental, but part is predisposition. It's just as likely that guys do certain things because they feel naturally drawn to those ways of acting/thinking.

[@anthonywestbrook2155]

I looked into the gender equality paradox a few years back, and these were my takeaways. In schools, boys and girls have roughly similar skills in STEM subjects. STEM jobs are pretty unappealing to most people. Enough girls do well in many subjects, that they then go into many types of fields, with reasonable hopes for career success. Enough boys do well only in STEM subjects, that they go into STEM fields if they want any chance at career success, whether or not they have any particular fondness for the subjects. This contributes most of the difference seen in the numbers of men and women in STEM fields. But, if this were the only explanation, we'd still expect to see more women in STEM based on how many of them performed similarly to the boys in the relevant studies. I can't remember the numbers, but it was somewhere in the range of expecting 3-14% more women than we see. And from my experience going to a trade school program with about a <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="1801">30:1</a> male:female ratio, and being best friends with one of the few women there, I can say that being one of the few women in a male dominated industry is... not for the faint of heart.

[@ETBrooD]

I'd also be interested in seeing how much overlap there is between the genders. Say, hypothetically, that around half of all men are equal (overlapping) to half of all women at a certain task, meaning the other half of all men are better/worse than women at the task, then this doesn't reveal anything about the two overlapping halves. It would show us that there are no gender differences until there are. A seemingly pointless exercise for around half the population in this hypothetical. The actual percentages do in fact strongly indicate that there's a very large overlap. As a group, men and women can perform differently. But this doesn't mean anything for the individual Veronica and James. We can't conclude anything on the individual level, so it's a pointless exercise outside of the individual.

[@manarmeziani857]

Would be very interesting to see, and if i had to bet on it, i would probably guess it overlaps more than we think and more than we want to admit

[@Bridge2110]

"We can't conclude anything on the individual level, so it's a pointless exercise outside of the individual" Literally the opposite. It's mostly pointless on the individual basis, but extremely important outside of the individual.

[@barsozuguler4300]

I don't know if my opinion is applicable with the video context but... As a man, I find your voice identical to mossbag from hollow knight community. I hear it like almost the same person is talking but in different tone. Is it something with verbal cognitive abilities or talking patterns

[@asherjafri5588]

As a high schooler there are genetic behavioral differences between men and women in behavior.

[@Yuusou.]

Great explanation of the subject. Just one minor improvement: match the volume of your voice with the voices of the guests. Specifically, Janet was far too low in volume and that's not good in a video with such a topic.

[@qualia765]

I was previously strongly of the opinion that genders are about the same. But I'm trans. And then as I started transitioning - notably beginning hormone replacement therapy - i came to realize that this is definitely false. I now process emotions very differently. Also what I need from social interactions has kinda changed a little. But I admit that there are conflicting factors such as being less depressed and having a deeper understanding of gender and generally being more mature. Also it just a single data point so it doesn't mean much either generally.

[@elismart13]

the hoog comment was halarious

[@hilowpeoples]

I do want to point out that Geary is in no way separating science from politics -- he's just choosing a political path that is more in line with the status quo. I would argue him pretending to take a non-political approach also makes his work... worse, as conflicts of interest should be stated by all researchers. Science is political. Everything is! That's Mannheim’s Paradox -- we can't think about political topics from a non-political viewpoint. We are bathed in politics, and that shapes how we think about everything, even if we don't realize it. Really, though, the study he did was kind of... inherently political? He was doing something more interdisciplinary with the realm of social science and analyzing gender equality issues, which are very much political as gender equality is often based on the law. Geary shows a clear disdain for certain types of political activism in the clips presented of him. He specifically mentions these people as being rude and dismissing his work -- but what does he make of people who use his work to further other agendas? If someone used his work to say that fighting for gender equality is useless and that women are just trying to victimize themselves, what would he say? I appreciate that you stated your bias because it was clear which researcher you preferred haha! I agree with your conclusion and I think ultimately it's good to remember that both researchers can be correct at the same time, in different contexts and even in tandem with each other.

[@prismfinancial5495]

One of the most interesting research i have see on the platform

[@wiebevdmeij]

Haha! <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="45">0:45</a> is crazy, roasting Hoog that hard

[@mariainnit]

Thank you for this video :)

[@MrAlanCristhian]

Which of those books you recomend the most?

[@GoldeneyeDoubleO7]

Quality video as always. The overall take here is not generalize. Aim to treat people individually by cultivating their strengths and improving their weaknesses.

[@LasseFroulundThomsen]

This is a grat example of why forceing men to do emotional tasks , and forceing women to do math tasks isn't right 😉 Women and men are just different 🤷🏻‍♂️ Not by a large margin but the difference are noticable.

[@gryphonschnitzel7140]

yeah because connecting new evidence and data to consensus and way more and better researched fields like evolutionary psychology is such a bad idea, i fear janet hyde is more of an ideologe than a scientist

[@shin-ishikiri-no]

When hypergamy stops I'll almost begin to start to believe in gender equality.

[@achmadichzan]

I like the transition to the advertisement 😂

[@chessbergen]

Before I watch the video, I just gotta say No.

[@seanrodgers1839]

Cojtroversy occurs when factual reality differs from what people wish to be true.

[@ZsebtelepHUN]

I was here before the title change

[@pace1195]

What was the previous title? I was too late to the party.

[@untantic]

@@pace1195 probably - Are Men Smarter than Men?

[@pace1195]

@@untantic Thanks.

[@untantic]

@@pace1195 sorry for mistake, i think they just change positon of Men and Women

[@MM-ux1kl]

Actually interesting thing here if you look at people with Autism Spectrum Disorder people they tend to have a slightly bigger brain(asymmetric) and more connections inside hemisphere, both female and males with ASD have these traits

[@akashverma5756]

Bro is trying hard to avoid controversy.

[@dsr3b]

You should have used "The Sexual Paradox" (2008) by Susan Pinker. Best book I've read on this topic.

[@RogerValor]

I actually think the variability hypothesis might be correct and a combination of historical evolutionary processes, as it resembles what societies preferred from men.

[@radubradu]

The thumbnail is of a man losing at chess in front of a woman. Chess has been segregated by sex in official competitions for the only reason that women kept losing before men. Let that sink in.

[@MichelleMartinez-l5w]

Thanks for the forecast! Could you help me with something unrelated: I have a SafePal wallet with USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (alarm fetch churn bridge exercise tape speak race clerk couch crater letter). How should I go about transferring them to Binance?

[@afterthesmash]

A: azimuth, adze, alimentary, astrology, asymmetry, aleph, acetaminophen, accrue, afterimage, afro, akimbo, affine, algorithm, adventitious, arc, ark, arch, archetype, archaeology, admittance, anima, anomie, android, anaphylactic, androgen, affect, affricative, adipose, abscissa, absinthe, ab (from ab initio), artesian, acromegaly ... Give me any theme, they pour out. The whole bag? All at once? I'm overwhelmed. It's not a sane task.

[@merrymachiavelli2041]

The straw-man of the 19th century eugenicist or anti-suffrage campaigner arguing that everything is nature hasn't been a relevant force in science in decades, yet is still resurrected to make things seem more 'both-sides-y' than they actually are. I'm not blaming this video, but it still kinda grinds my gears when the 'other side' to the everything-is-gender-norms people is presented as a Victorian dude with a monocle.

[@hyreonk]

Even though women and men can be equally good at math, spatial reasoning is very helpful in learning mathematics, and men have that on by default. Women need to learn to use it. So the stereotype doesn't come out of thin air.

[@nguyenpham5097]

So on the general level, there is no difference but there is a difference in tendency?

[@Gabi-dt7jn]

I needed a lot of visual-spatial memory for math (matrices, anything multi-dimensional). What kind of math problems are getting tested?

[@jerrygreenest]

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="19">0:19</a> after the answer is given, I still think it's A

[@dwsel]

3 blocks at the top of the sample shape, 2 blocks at the top of A shape.

[@stechuskaktus8318]

Smells like bait.

[@jerrygreenest]

Yes, I do see now. Didn't notice the third block

[@ChimiChuri-k2o]

what does python have to do with this video?

[@memeabledata]

I write the code of my data animations in python

[@avivastudios2311]

I'm a woman and I got the answer C. So that's interesting.

[@HUEHUEUHEPony]

now people will ask if u have a bf

[@accurategamer7085]

you have a bf?

[@nicokey5428]

This video: men have better spatial awareness than women Me a guy:gets all of them wrong

[@Xlsior_OWo]

love the thumbnail, (im a chess player/nerd hahahaha)

[@DodoLP]

if girls are as good at math as boys, why do girls need their own Girls math olympiad (in Europe atleast)? :DDDDD

[@fireoox]

They are as good only because of their higher motivation and higher effort in studying, men are slightly if not significantly better than women at math, and btw the same goes for chess where men absolutely dominate women

[@hanh2122011]

I read the title and I already see the opening of saving private Ryan in my mind while imaging how the comment section look like. Well it goes as expected.

[@deleted_handle]

The ad 😭💀

[@jacobmejer5082]

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="561">9:21</a> "It means that for example, the average man performs better at mentally rotating objects than about 61-70% of women". I think what you meant to say is that 61-70% of men perform better than the average women. Great video though :) Edit: Someone smart pointed out that it's probably correct what you said, but misrepresented/wrong in the video

[@Bot28111]

Its possible he means that the average men does it better than 61 to 70 women from amongst 100.

[@manarmeziani857]

The opposite doesn't carry the same meaning. Could be that a John Doe against 100 women on that task wins 61-70 times OR that the majority of men win at that task confronted to a Jane Doe.

[@stechuskaktus8318]

@@manarmeziani857 That's correct. The numbers in the video suggest the results are exactly the same in each view though, because both columns add up to 100%. First column says 61-70% of men are doing better than Jane Doe, meaning Jane Doe does better than (100-61=39) - (100-70=30)% of men. Second column says John Doe wins against 61-70 women out of 100. Either the statistics are misrepresented, or both expressions, which don't necessarily mean the same thing, in this case happen to produce the exact same numbers.

[@jacobmejer5082]

Yeah ok, it seems that he said the right thing, but wrote the wrong thing. Would be a crazy coincidence that the numbers added up to 100 every time.

[@rgonzalo511]

Considering that a large portion of social psychology research doesn't replicate. While for evo psychology it does. I'm tempted to agree with the evolutionary psychologists here. I mean we already start seeing sex differences as young as babies. What socializing is affecting babies? Its just cope to think men and women are the same. Our evolutionary histories are simply too different. Evolution would've never chosen for us to be equally intelligent since both genders faced different challenges.

[@explorer_1113]

the thing is, the environment affects your neural connections too. While the brains may be different at birth, the environment and what you interact with shapes changes your brain. This is known as neuroplasticity.

[@Ung97]

There's no goshdang way people have only a 14 word average on a given letter, right? The paper has to be wrong? I got 34 words on B in a minute. Is it a bilingual thing? I'd love to see some study on multilingual people's verbal fluency compared to monolingual people's.