Difference between revisions of "Male variability"
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
*[[Intelligence]] |
*[[Intelligence]] |
||
*[[Parental investment theory]] |
*[[Parental investment theory]] |
||
| + | |||
| + | {{Male Variability}} |
||
[[Category: Sex Differences]] |
[[Category: Sex Differences]] |
||
Latest revision as of 00:18, 24 April 2025
- https://archive.is/fZmVv
- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886913003036
- OP distribution by gender
- https://independent.co.uk/news/education/higher/dr-paul-irwing-there-are-twice-as-many-men-as-women-with-an-iq-of-120-plus-426321.html
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3612964/
- https://www.forbes.com/sites/traversmark/2021/12/28/men-are-more-likely-to-behave-in-an-all-or-nothing-way-according-to-new-psychological-research/
- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0092656612001730
- https://neurosciencenews.com/extreme-decisions-males-18535/
- https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/from-sex-to-gender-modern-dismissal-of-biology/
- https://avoiceformen.com/featured/men-are-exceptional-2/
- https://www.nature.com/articles/nature04966
- https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/cambridge-handbook-of-the-international-psychology-of-women/sex-gender-and-intelligence/162037156813E98AE48EF68DB5FA184B
- https://archive.is/wip/pd29m
- "no genetic evidence"
- https://www.docdroid.net/JmkLaFI/jintell201504005-pdf
Often claimed to have been discredited.
Absolutely proven in certain areas: height weight, hand size.
Compelling evidence for personality.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3612964/
Very strong evidence for IQ, and this is true regardless of what IQ means.
Opponents are free claim it isn't true in a particular area, and in some cases this is likely true. Robert Brockway mentioned the possibility of counter-examples in this original article.
Male variability doesn't claim to be universally true just generally true.
Robert Brockway postulates that counter-examples exist and that, in particular, female sexual response is a counter-example. Women, on average, take longer to achieve orgasm than men, but more importantly there facility to orgasm varies significantly more. A man with a widely variant sexual response may ejaculate less frequently. This would be a negative selective pressure which would favour men with a more conventional sexual response. Thus natural selection keeps the male sexual response within narrow bounds, overcoming male variability. In contrast female sexual response is able to vary widely.