Why are the virtually 0 girls who do engineering or hard sciences?

Bomber_BoBHaha serious? Bio is pretty hard because at the upper level all the kids who take classes want to go to some competitive grad program so literally everyone shoots for an A.

Take a look at engineering... So many kids do that shit and get by with Just C's and low B's because they know they can land a job. Sorry to get you off your high horse but engineering really isn't that hard.

PizzaKidWell I'm a freshman in ME and out of the 650 freshmen in the program only 35 are girls..

SpssAlso what the op article shows, feilimation, is not that the avg woman intelligence is higher than males. It shows that men are borderline retarded and borderline genius at a higher rate than women. If you disregard the people with below avg intelligence and look at people with iqs of 90 and up, the avg male will have a noticiably higher iq than the avg female. And when you look at genius range iqs, there are significantly more men than women in that range.
Not so fond of data massaging anymore, are we, feilination?

Katrinaim an engineer

shocker611Haha Jesus Christ this is so off. I have to take a ton of upper level bio/chem despite bein engineering in order to graduate (biomed), and the engineering courseload is literally 100x harder than any bio or chemistry I've ever taken. The only reason I've ever gotten less than an A in any of them is because I had engineering classes that took 99.9% of my time and I didn't give a shit about the bio/chem classes. But seriously, bio/chem is easy as shit, sorry to burst your bubble

DIX~So a class where everyone gets an A is hard but a class where everyone gets C's isn't hard? Nice logic. I bet getting a C+ average in senior year engineering takes the same effort as getting an A- average senior year bio.

Engineering is definitely in the top 3 hardest undergraduate programs you can do, Bio is a joke.

Bomber_BoBYou never took high enough level classes in biology then... Also I don't even think bio classes are "hard", they are a joke with respect to grad level courses. I just think if you think engineering is hardest thing in the world and it pales in comparison to biology then you are just taking the wrong biology classes or you're a shitty engineer.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

shocker611I have taken multiple graduate level biology courses. Human Evolutionary Genetics and Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, both being considered the "hardest" from the people I have talked to in the bio department, and both were pretty freakin easy. In addition biochem 1/2 which everyone acts like is some weedout class were a joke.

Bomber_BoBHaha serious? Bio is pretty hard because at the upper level all the kids who take classes want to go to some competitive grad program so literally everyone shoots for an A.

Take a look at engineering... So many kids do that shit and get by with Just C's and low B's because they know they can land a job. Sorry to get you off your high horse but engineering really isn't that hard.

CaptainDickbuttMy wife is a mechanical engineer and exposes me for the retard I am.

shocker611I have taken multiple graduate level biology courses. Human Evolutionary Genetics and Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, both being considered the "hardest" from the people I have talked to in the bio department, and both were pretty freakin easy. In addition biochem 1/2 which everyone acts like is some weedout class were a joke.

Bomber_BoBIdk what to say to you... I just looked at UC's biomed req's and they aren't required to take anything past 3000 for biology. So if you're telling me you took 6000 level classes, so 6000 genetics, 6000 cellular molecular neuroscience, and 6000 biochem, then more power to you.

But pretty damn sure you didn't and you took the 3000 level classes.

Download-My-AppsBoys, girls. At the higher level all programs are hard. Engineering might be hard for some Bio might be hard for others.

Engineers in general appear to be believe that they are smarter than other programs. But its not true, it does require a skill that is time consuming but it may not involve much critical thinking.

So lets all agree to disagree, we're all basically brilliant.

Snowflake222lmao this is great

Bomber_BoBIdk what to say to you... I just looked at UC's biomed req's and they aren't required to take anything past 3000 for biology. So if you're telling me you took 6000 level classes, so 6000 genetics, 6000 cellular molecular neuroscience, and 6000 biochem, then more power to you.

But pretty damn sure you didn't and you took the 3000 level classes.

blondie.Your point of engineering lacking "critical thinking" is stupid. That being said, I also dislike the engineering high horse, and I appreciate your attempt at arbitration.

Download-My-AppsI actually have no idea what engineering courses entail, I was just stating compared to more abstract courses engineering might involve less critical thinking. Obviously they require lots of thought and analysis, I wasn't meaning to shit on anyones degree.

Bomber_BoBHaha clearly reading comprehension isn't a necessity to be an engineer. What I was implying is that biology is a lot more competitive than engineering because only the top of the class can actually do something with their degree, unlike engineering where you can get by with mediocre grades and still get a solid job after you graduate. Difference is because it so competitive at the top and teachers grade on a bell, it makes it very difficult to get an A.

I never denied engineering isn't a hard major either, I just think you have no idea what you're talking about with respect to other majors.

DIX~No, you said bio that was hard. "Bio is pretty hard because at the upper level all the kids who take classes want to go to some competitive grad program so literally everyone shoots for an A."

I don't even know what we're arguing about anymore but I'll happily continue. You think bio is the only major that grades on a curve or something? Or that people wanting to get into competitive grad programs don't shoot for A's? And I'm not an engineer, I'm 14 and still in high school :>

Anathemalol girls are only good at art and being naked. which is kind of an art. so just art.

faggot_commanderIts because Women are fucking weak, insecure, let emotions override common sense, and can't tell the difference between leadership and bossy.

I fucking said it. Put your fucking 'power suit' on and come the fuck at me.

SpssWe also wasted a ton of precept time learning the 2 dimensional method for dealing with stoichiometry so that the girls could deal with it. Most boys are easily able to rotate 3 dimensional objects in their head.

DIX~No, you said bio that was hard. "Bio is pretty hard because at the upper level all the kids who take classes want to go to some competitive grad program so literally everyone shoots for an A."

I don't even know what we're arguing about anymore but I'll happily continue. You think bio is the only major that grades on a curve or something? Or that people wanting to get into competitive grad programs don't shoot for A's? And I'm not an engineer, I'm 14 and still in high school :>

Bomber_BoBAre you dense bro? You said something along the lines "So a class where everyone gets an A is hard but a class where everyone gets C's isn't hard? Nice logic.". I am saying you are illiterate because I never said "everyone gets an A", I just said the majority of the class needs an A making the top more competitive than most other majors.

And no I am sure there are some engineers who want to go into graduate programs and they care a lot for their grade and strive to score as high as possible. But I can assure you with respect to some natural sciences this level of competition is not the same simply due to other natural sciences being a useless 4 year degree and you need to continue to get a higher education to receive a promising job.

SpssIf by critical you mean "lacking depth" than its true engineering does not involve critical thing while many other majors do

cheaaaaaahuh? Sorry, but even if you can find a study that statistically significantly can support sexual differences in the capacity for spatial reasoning, i very much doubt there is a difference large enough to make a functional difference. (if you have a peer reviews paper to support it i'd love to see it). so yeah, thats TOTAL bs that classes are catered to leveling the playing field between men and women over concepts that require different sorts of reasoning. never go full retard

Edward.The worst class average for an exam I've ever personally taken was a 45 which was in organic chem. I've never seen a class average for an exam lower than 50 in any of my biology classes. Meanwhile, friends of mine have told me that in their engineering classes, they've seen averages in the 30's.

AT-ATI had a structures exam that was one problem. The problem took the whole 3 hours to solve. The class average for the test was a 33. It happens, but it's usually the teachers fault for such low test averages.

SpssYou must think your shit doesnt stink because it comes out of the same place you talk out of.
Dude youre the bitch who complained to the mods about how badly i destroyed you in the discussion of drug addiction, asking them to delete my posts, arent you?

I learned about sex differences in spatial ability my junior year at princeton in one of my req psych classes. our precept was half boys, and we were given a mental rotation identity task. All the boys got it within one minute, while none of the girls got it even by the end of the class. Some of the girls were visibly distraught; just like you they had some laymens viewpoint that boys and girls were equal in every way.
In orgo the preceptor even explained that the stoichiometry 2d conversion was mainly meant for the girls because they, in her experience, had a harder time dealing with 3d rotation.

straight from wiki;
"metastudies show a male advantage in mental rotation and assessing horizontality and verticality,[48][107]"

and heres your fucking peer reviewed studies
Neisser, Ulric; Boodoo, Gwyneth; Bouchard, Thomas J., Jr.; Boykin, A. Wade; Brody, Nathan; Ceci, Stephen J.; Halpern, Diane F.; Loehlin, John C.; Perloff, Robert (1996). "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns". American Psychologist 51 (2): 77–101. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.77.

Chrisler, Joan C; Donald R. McCreary. Handbook of Gender Research in Psychology. Springer, 2010. ISBN 9781441914644.

you really like saying "peer reviewed" dont you?
does it boost your ego? Do you like saying things like that to appear more authoritative and intellectual?

you really need to get rid of your fucking ridiculously conceited attitude.
Instead of asking me for "peer reviewed" sources, just ask for sources,

or better yet, remember all the times in the past that ive embarrassed the fuck out of you, showing that your scholarly attitude doesnt prevent you from being completely fucking wrong in your fat-headed pompous assertions, and just exercise the possibility that i just might, just might, not be full of shit, and look up the studies yourself.

That will save you the embarrassment that has happened countless times before and again here, and it will be harder for people to pin you down as the inferior person you are.

Go cry to the mods again about how i was mean to you, you child

shocker611Jesus it still cracks me up when you call other people conceited, when you make sure to post "IN MY PRINCETON CLASS" in every thread I see on here. Good lord you are a douche.

SpssIf i had said, in my (insert whatever joke comm college you went to) class, it wouldnt hold water.

.MASSHOLE.You would think that a Princeton education would teach you some sort of social interaction skills as well as proper grammar and spelling. Or some sort humility.

cobra_commanderIts because Women are fucking weak, insecure, let emotions override common sense, and can't tell the difference between leadership and bossy.

SpssEverybody makes gramatical mistakes, like you just did. I dont give adequate fucks to correct them. Also ive been on this site for a while, but only recently started dropping my uni sat and iq score on people when i saw others do it. Also ns is war, so why not bring everything to the table?

yuckyeah, i am quite aware of what engineering is. in my experience it has been (mostly) pure math and science. the real applications of that math and science dont become super apparent until third year really. the first two years of engineering is core math/calc and specific science courses depending on your major. its not much different than pure science at that point. do you think that highschool people picking their uni degree really would know the difference anyways? what difference would it make to a highschool girl? its not like they would say "oh my female brain definitely cant handle the things that make engineering different than regular science, so i will do regular science" if they dont know what those differences actually are.

matocoThe people on here saying that women don't have the brain power or lack the "wiring" to succeed in engineering are so full of shit it is not even funny. Many of the female engineering students I have worked with are just as smart, if not smarter, than male students.

Download-My-AppsI don't think this has anything to do with biological gender differences but at a young age we are encouraged to do certain behaviours based on gender. Toys like lego are often marketed to boys (indirectly giving skills that might lead to engineering) where as thing girls are given toy kitchen sets that might encourage a more social environment.

feihlinationdamn dude youre pretty intolerant. after pseudo-scientific (or politically justified) racism, you now go to the same sexism. i can show you 10 studies that say men are dumber, there are more intelligent women, or whatnot.

feihlinationand op, you say you need an IQ of over 110 to study engineering?

and just to reiterate, you acknowledge that the vast majority of people is made up of people with IQs of 90-110, where women are more intelligent according to your article? let me correct my statement: roughly 60%, not 90% of people fall into that group.

dumb people are more likely men, so up until an IQ of roughly 115, or 85% of the population, women are more intelligent. this is kind of neglected in the article to make a provocative, non-scientific point.


good "positivist" science is value-free. but you only post biased and bad science on here, produced by scientific outlaws who just say something to promote their racism/sexism under the label of "scientific freedom".

horseshit. absolute horseshit.

yuckyeah, i am quite aware of what engineering is. in my experience it has been (mostly) pure math and science. the real applications of that math and science dont become super apparent until third year really. the first two years of engineering is core math/calc and specific science courses depending on your major. its not much different than pure science at that point. do you think that highschool people picking their uni degree really would know the difference anyways? what difference would it make to a highschool girl? its not like they would say "oh my female brain definitely cant handle the things that make engineering different than regular science, so i will do regular science" if they dont know what those differences actually are.

matocoThe people on here saying that women don't have the brain power or lack the "wiring" to succeed in engineering are so full of shit it is not even funny. Many of the female engineering students I have worked with are just as smart, if not smarter, than male students.

Download-My-AppsI don't think this has anything to do with biological gender differences but at a young age we are encouraged to do certain behaviours based on gender. Toys like lego are often marketed to boys (indirectly giving skills that might lead to engineering) where as thing girls are given toy kitchen sets that might encourage a more social environment.

feihlinationdamn dude youre pretty intolerant. after pseudo-scientific (or politically justified) racism, you now go to the same sexism. i can show you 10 studies that say men are dumber, there are more intelligent women, or whatnot.

feihlinationand op, you say you need an IQ of over 110 to study engineering?

and just to reiterate, you acknowledge that the vast majority of people is made up of people with IQs of 90-110, where women are more intelligent according to your article? let me correct my statement: roughly 60%, not 90% of people fall into that group.

dumb people are more likely men, so up until an IQ of roughly 115, or 85% of the population, women are more intelligent. this is kind of neglected in the article to make a provocative, non-scientific point.


good "positivist" science is value-free. but you only post biased and bad science on here, produced by scientific outlaws who just say something to promote their racism/sexism under the label of "scientific freedom".

horseshit. absolute horseshit.