My brain is made of string, and little flying pixies.
"Shadow Dancer" <insomniac at winterslight.org> wrote in message
news:aglmbq$mo8oc$1 at ID-150265.news.dfncis.de...
> Chive doesn't have to.
>> If you know anything about the "wiring" of male versus female brains, then
> you would know that women use their brains far more efficiently than men
do.
>> The cerebral cortex of a man's brain behaves as though damaged, allowing
> only the random signal to travel from one side to another. Other than
that,
> most neural firing is confined to either one side, or the other.
>> Women, however, have a f, lly-functioning cerebral cortex and neural
firing
> is nearly constant across this 'bridge', using the brain far more
> efficiently.
>> Bwah.
>>> "PETER BUONO" <PFBUONO at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:fBqX8.94141$UT.6217925 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...> > Devin's only golden opportunity are showers in that very color.
> >
> > "x9k23Plg8dgmrxz83jfph0e35h" <x9k23Plg8dgmrxz83jfph0e35h at yahoo.com>
wrote
> in
> > message news:ec4674b3.0207111433.88db9bf at posting.google.com...> > > ...To prove that you can offer a pro-feminist, pro-equality argument
> > > using FACTS and EVIDENCE, as you claim you do.
> > >
> > > Here on board we have John Knight, arch antifeminist and author of a
> > > proposal to repeal the Nineteenth Amendment. In this thread, he's
> > > arguing with facts and evidence that seems to support his claim that
> > > women are intellectually inferior to men.
> > >
> > > So come on Chive, show us your salt, show us you're not merely some
> > > annoying spammer trying to take control of an anarchical alt.group.
> > > Let's see you put your money where your keyboard is and prove that you
> > > _really_are_ concerned with feminism, facts, and evidence.
> > >
> > > "John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> wrote in message
> > news:<UUZW8.33126$P%6.2756978 at news2.west.cox.net>...
> > > > "Mark D. Morin" <mdmpsyd at NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:3D2C11FA.5020603 at NOSPAMgwi.net...> > > > > Bob LeChevalier wrote:
> > > > > > "Mark D. Morin" <mdmpsyd at NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>What does all of this have to do with the assertion that there
is
> a
> > > > > >>gender bias in IQ testing? Mattarazzo (1972 *Weschler's
> Measurement
> > and
> > > > > >>Appraisal of Adult Intelligence*) reviewd the then current
> > literature
> > > > > >>quite extensively (p 352 ff). He cited numerous studies that
> > attempted
> > > > > >>to demonstrate such a difference and failed to do so.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think that his claim is that, since (if) Weschler
intentionally
> > > > omitted
> > > > > > subtests
> > > > >
> > > > > Subtests did not exist before they were constructed.
> > > > >
> > > > > > that men did better on than women, that the bias for a false
> > > > > > equality was built into the test from the beginning. If he
indeed
> > > > eliminated
> > > > > > all subtests that show a gender difference, then of course you
> will
> > not
> > > > find
> > > > > > studies that demonstrate a difference.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But then one is never entirely sure what the nincompoop (JK)
> really
> > > > thinks.
> > > > >
> > > > > seems like a great conspiracy theorist. I wonder if he believes in
> > alien
> > > > > abductions too. He really should take a course on psychometrics
and
> > > > > test construction before making the comments he does.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > This of course is the very argument that Peter Zohrab predicted
> > "liberals"
> > > > would resort to when confronted with simple FACTS.
> > > >
> > > > If every test known to humankind DOES demonstrate a "systemic gender
> > > > difference" [read: in English, the natural difference between the
> > sexes],
> > > > but so-called "IQ tests" do not, then it's not me who's
suspect--it's
> > > > Wechsler and his fellow "scientists" who evidently manipulated the
> data
> > > > right from the start, and all "educators" and politicians who
followed
> > right
> > > > along like little lemmings.
> > > >
> > > > John Knight
> >
> >
>>
