I found a nice paper by Richard Lynn and Satoshi Kanazawa discussing sex differences in IQ. The point of the paper is that females mature earlier than males so females are smarter in childhood, but after puberty males are smarter. This fits Lion of the Blogosphere’s theory that puberty stunts certain parts of intelligence. As to why females mature earlier, the authors speculate that perhaps females had to compete for mates during evolution, but males not so much.
Here are the scores of the males and females in a large UK sample:
Here are the tests they took with the respective g loadings:
Interesting that reading and math skills should each have such high g loadings. Maybe the SAT’s more g loaded than I think.
I’m sure the sex differences (after puberty) were much smaller than Lynn would have liked since he virtually pioneered the men are smarter than women theory, overturning a near century consensus that the sexes were equally intelligent.
Lynn might argue that the lack of spatial tests at age 16 underestimates the male advantage. I would counter that the lack of social cognition tests overestimates the male advantage. Perhaps just testing reading and math is a good compromise, since these were probably selected because they’re the most valued cognitive skills in modern society and not because they favor or don’t favor one sex or another.
Pumpkin Person 
one of the effects of XY is taller and bigger brain.
would be interesting to compare males and females at the same height.
do males still have larger brains?
Yes, but even equating for height, men are bigger than women.
like males still have larger brains because more robust.
but not much larger.
likely males still…
so if you compare like a singaporean male and an icelandic female of the same height maybe they have the same brain size.
what that jew harvard president, larry summers, said is NOT controversial…unless facts are controversial.
1. males and females have the same mean.
2. there are more boy geniuses and more boy retards.
It was the implication that it was genetic that got him in trouble. You’re allowed to talk about group differences, as long as you blame them on environment.
Summers is nomenclatura. If he says that, it shows the elite are not as pc as they pay people to teach in colleges.
The implication that it’s “genetic” is wrong; multi-level systems, etc.
blaming the dearth of female geniuses on patriarchy is kind of lame.
but i count myself an extreme feminist in that i think all the girly stuff is just stockholm syndrome.
no make up. no jewelry. no less attractive.
i want an equal. not an inferior.
i want julia sans makeup.
julia
julia flyte
so many connections that shouldn’t be.
so i wonder if all the girly stuff is just inequality and “the market” and capitalism.
why do women feel this need to be pretty more than men (with the exception of italian men)?
you’re beautiful.
Because women (with the exception of Oprah) are dependent on men for money, power and status.
that’s what i just said.
stupid woman!
Your comment was ambiguous, but if that’s what you meant then good
there’s some kind of skeletal and color thing…
exercise can’t make you much more attractive in terms of spouse…just for sex.
neither dianna quick nor suzanna hamilton were great beauties, not ingrid level, but in the context…
I think if you added social IQ and spatial IQ you’d find wider variance. There are a lot of guys like Terry Tao that would be considered retarded at the former. And there are a lot of girls that can’t even read a bank statement.
Im doing the tax returns for my parents. My dad, is a genetic retard and my mother has the concentration levels of small puppy. I think one of the reasons women might not be good at math is that its really boring. I mean, I always found it boring and complained to the teacher when it was math time in school.
I remember doing a spelling bee and coming second to a girl at about 12 years old. She was also the girl I fancied so it was quite ironic. Her dad was a doctor I think. Which is pretty elite here.
BTW I grew up in a house with only the bible to read and no internet back then.
Yeah, Philo, I would say that attentiveness is a response to how stimulated you are to that activity. If that activity is giving you no form of mental or physical stimulation, you’re less likely to invest any mental energy into it, let alone emotions. Women are dictated by emotional response to activities, thus their brain is made for social interactions. In terms of social IQ, I would say women lack depth, meaning, and overall understanding of others’ intentions in a cognitive way. On the other hand, they’re very good at identifying which emotions are the driving force for an action, just not the actual motives. This is also a reason testosterone is so important, because it neutralizes emotions, and thus dampens empathy while allowing room for a non-biased perspective to an action’s motives.
Is accounting considered quantitative? I don’t think it is. Women tend to do as well as men in that. Except for really arcane areas of insurance and financial accounting. I actually enjoyed accounting in school. I remember doing 7 or 8 balance sheets for homework and enjoying the process.
I’m trying to go into finance myself, and I would say that a lot of it is categorization, as in putting labels to different entities, allowing women to be good at accounting.
I think if you literally put a gun to the head of some women, they could be a lot better at math just by sheer brute practice. But if you forced the comp science undergrads into a nightclub every night and told them to try get laid…..i don’t think practice would help too much. I dunno. Maybe. With a coach maybe.
I think the comp guys would do well with added testosterone. It’s a lot harder to invest emotions than cognitive processes. The problem with the whole thing is that all thoughts are dictated by emotions. There is no objectivity in this world, all perceptions you have in this life are dictated by the emotional heuristics of past experiences. So to get the added benefit of coaching in terms of Game, you need to really be able to change a person’s perspective on past events. Now some memories and heuristics are just ingrained in a person, so even without past experiences, there is a level of understanding a male has when he is with a female that allows him to measure his value against her. If he feels inadequate, he’s obviously not going to do well. But if you let the guy process more value for himself emotionally, he’ll have a lot better outcome.
Now on to Gates, I think his problem is that he is so separated from black society that he feels he is doing something that is guilty. All human connections in this Universe are based on how close we are to other manifestations of reality. If we can’t connect ourselves to a fundamental part of reality, then we are doomed to guilt.
I think Gates is so smart, that he thinks in a cosmic sense, measuring the odds of him being born into moderate to severe poverty, and so he feels like he needs to make all humans escape poverty so in a cosmic sense, no one can fall into poverty. By destroying poverty from ever existing, you’re essentially putting yourself in God-mode and allowing for yourself to never reach something that fails to exist. That’s what I think the emotional mechanism for Communism is too. Just empathy for those suffering because you wouldn’t want yourself in that position. If something doesn’t exist, then you can’t end up in it, and therefore saving yourself as well.