Forum Overview :: Motherfucking News :: Re: Hey, Zseni!

[quote name="Oratio"]Most articles like this are bullshit. In general, the lie is a complete focus on difference. Reading the entire stat body a different way, you'd find that 97% of people are pretty much the same, and only 2-3% differ on any one thing. Except this gets turned into shit like 'woman aren't as good at science or math' Well, no, for example, 64% (to pull a number out of my ass) of them in general excelled, except that gosh, in this study, 67% of men did. These kinds of divisive statistics do not take into consideration that most percentages come from statistical outliers. Men could have a slightly higher percentage of skilled anything at all, but in the media, this morphs into no woman is as good as any one man. One explanation I've heard for this is another bullshit stat, but at least it fits the criteria. The (bullshit) study found that for (bullshit) things, women tend to have a lower statistical standard deviation than men. In plain terms, while both men and women will have the exact same average, men will tend to have both the best and worst statistical outliers, the anomalies. The bell curve extremeties.They will have like the 3 smartest, most capable, blah whatever people, and also the 2-3 worst. In this tennis study, they are only studying excellence. I guess, if you only study excellence, in general you may (if you believe any of this), find that men will be the top performers. If someone wanted to fund a study about how shitty tennis players played, they'd probably find that the men choked more in competition. None of this means anything at all, of course. At least, not in any study that someone did in order to write an article or get some letters after their name.[/quote]