> Issues > Stupidity
> Are Women just Dumb, After All ?
Are Women just Dumb,
After All ?
© Peter Zohrab 2002
The handful of us who have the gumption and the guts in Western societies
actually to review critically what our Feminists gurus preach -- these few
of us are bound to wonder if mere bias and totalitarian arrogance are enough
to explain how much of Feminist propaganda is sheer nonsense. Maybe it's really
just that women -- or maybe only Feminist women -- are stupid, after all !
Not only that, but we need to ask whether men's and women's
brains and minds are functionally on a par -- and whether any male researcher
would dare to publish a finding that women's brains or minds were inferior,
in today's Orwellian universities.
I have been thinking of writing about men's and women's mental
capacities for some time, for the following reasons:
Feminists have changed Western educational systems to such an extent
that boys are now doing worse than girls academically, and sometimes it
is implied that this is because boys are inherently less intelligent than
There is a commonly heard statement that girls mature earlier than
My chance hearing of an interview (on Radio New Zealand's Kim Hill
show) that mentioned the relative sizes of men's and women's brains.
My most recent spur to writing about this topic was seeing
a short article (about women having greater cell-density in one part of the
brain) in Wellington's "Dominion" newspaper (November 14th 2001), with the
headline "Women beat men in brain cell count." Since most of the New Zealand
media, most of the time, are just Feminist propaganda outlets, I knew I would
have to research the origin of this story to discover the truth.
Sure enough, this headline turned out to be contradicted by
the facts. On the BBC News website (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_1653000/1653687.stm
) there was a longer article: "Women have more brain cells," dated Tuesday,
13 November, 2001. Unlike the Dominion's article, this page makes it clear
that women have greater brain-cell density only because their brains are smaller
than men's brains, so a greater cell-density would be the only way that they
could end up with something approaching the same number of brain cells as
men have ! So both the Dominion's and the BBC's feminist headlines trumpeted
a lie: women were not actually reported as having more brain cells over-all,
or in any region of the brain ! So the journalists who approved those two
headlines were also "dense" -- or deliberately lying.
In fact, the BBC article quotes the female author of the research
as saying that this greater density "might account for the fact that women
are ten times more likely to develop some psychiatric conditions such as panic
attacks and anxiety disorders."
Another psychiatrist was quoted as saying that "there is no
difference in the mental performance of men and women," but I am skeptical
as to whether Feminist intimidation of academics in Western universities allows
this issue to be researched objectively. See: http://www.eugenics.net/papers/rushton.html
Working backwards to my 4th reason for discussing this topic,
I was fascinated by the different attitudes of Feminist Kim Hill (she is actually
a very intelligent Feminist, in my opinion) and the
female scientist that she was interviewing. The topic of the sizes of
men's and women's brains came up, and the scientist mentioned that this could
not just be related to the fact that men's bodies are usually larger than
women's bodies. That was because big men did not, on average, have bigger
brains than small men, and big women did not -- on average -- have bigger
brains than small women. Kim Hill wanted to pursue the implications of this,
despite the fact that this might lead to un-Feminist conclusions, but it was
the female scientist who wanted to drop the issue ! If I didn't already have
masses of evidence of the Leftist bias of our universities, I would have been
deeply shocked at her attitude.
You will recall that my 3rd reason for discussing this topic
was the issue of girls maturing earlier than boys do. I am not going to argue
with that idea -- just with the way it is interpreted. Teachers, being mostly
female, interpret that early maturation as a positive, resulting in girls
being better behaved in class than boys, and perhaps in their studying harder
than boys do.
But, surely, don't people say that the fact that humans have
a longer period of immaturity, compared to other animals, allows us to learn
more and develop more complex abilities and social organisations ? Maybe,
if boys both mature later than girls and end up having bigger brains than
their female counterparts, they are actually "brainier" ? And would any female
scientist ever admit this, or any male scientist dare to say it -- if it was
in fact true ?
If girls mature earlier than boys, they must lose this brain
adaptability earlier than boys, which means that boys are bound to learn more
-- whether what they learn more of is classroom-related is another issue entirely.
Turning to my second point (above), since the Feminist, female-dominated teaching
profession has moved away from competition, individual work, examinations
and corporal punishment towards group-work and continuous assessment, it may
be that boys will increasingly be forced to do their most important learning
outside the classroom, which has become feminised territory. Since schools
are hostile to boys, boys have been made to appear educationally inferior
to girls, whereas the reverse may be the actual biological state of affairs.
Although IQ tests apparently show that boys/men and girls/women
have about the same IQ, on average, the IQ test itself is an artificial creation
by academics. The various versions of the IQ test are compilations of questions
designed to test certain supposed types of abilities, and the results of the
scores on these various ability-tests are combined to produce an IQ. The "invention"
of these various "abilities" is an arbitrary act, and so is the decision to
include or not include particular questions to test for these abilities. Given
that racial activists have in the past claimed that IQ tests are culturally
biased, and that supposedly unbiased tests have been devised, how can we tell
if IQ tests are fair to boys and men ?
The later maturation of boys than girls and men's larger brains
both imply that boys and men are intellectually more capable than girls and
women -- yet IQ tests do not show this to be the case. Given the "liberal"
(i.e. totalitarian Leftist) bias of Western universities, we have to suspect
the possibility of deliberate Feminist tampering with IQ tests to produce
a result that is more in accord with Feminist theory than with "mere" reality.
The Stupidity of Feminist Lies
As we saw above, both the BBC and the Dominion (and no doubt
lots of other media around the World) used a pro-women lie as a headline over
an article that contradicted the headline. This happens almost routinely in
Western Feminist societies, and the question arises whether the Feminist journalists
involved are liars or just plain stupid.
Consider the following:
Feminists have routinely defined Feminism as the search for sexual
yet it has never occurred to them to give Men's and Fathers' groups an
equal share in choosing the issues where men
and women should be made equal, or an equal
share in the process of defining what "equality"
would mean for the issues that are selected.
Feminists routinely use phrases such as "Equality for Women", but this
is an absurdity. Equality is a symmetrical relationship -- i.e. if a
is equal to b, then b
must also be equal to a ! The appropriate phrase
would be "Equality for Men and Women" -- but
the Feminists avoid that phrase, either because they are stupid, or because
that might force them to do something to improve men's status and power
in some respects.
Feminists routinely claim that women get paid less than men, putting
the blame on discrimination by men. They say that women only get about
83% (or some such figure) of the average male wage -- yet their statistics
never take into account the length of the careers of the individuals concerned
! Because women routinely take time out of their careers to have and raise
children (and then usually get sole custody of them upon divorce), the
average female career is shorter than the average male career -- which
inevitably means that they are less senior than their male colleagues,
on average, and therefore that their pay will be less ! This should be
fairly obvious, but these Feminist statistics continue to compare men
and women only by age !
Feminists used to complain that boys in classrooms hogged teachers'
time and then started a big campaign to counter this problem. It was eventually
shown to be a myth (by Australian Professor Eileen Byrne), but, even if
it had been true, no Feminist ever attempted to show that girls actually
suffered actual harm because of this ! How do we know that the girls (and
undemonstrative boys), in such a classroom, didn't just get on with their
work, resulting in better learning for them, while a couple of boys, to
the detriment of their own learning, were trying to hog the attention
of attractive female teachers -- since most teachers are now female ?
As far as Domestic Violence is concerned, Feminists discount or ignore
the research in this area, which overwhelmingly shows that women hit men
as often as men hit women, and the Feminists teach the police to arrest
the man in any heterosexual dispute. ( See: http://www.landwave.com/family/
) Then the Feminists point to the arrest statistics as proof that men
commit most of the Domestic Violence !
Still on the topic of Domestic Violence, Feminist gurus on this subject
routinely state that psychological abuse is worse than physical abuse.
However, it does not seem to have penetrated the Feminists' skulls that
women are arguably much more skilled at psychological
abuse than men are. The police in Feminist-dominated (i.e. Western)
societies concentrate on arresting men (rather than women) for physical
(rather than psychological) abuse, which is absurd, in the light of the
Feminist author Kate Millet, in her book, "Sexual Politics" says that
the fact that the police are mainly male shows that the State oppresses
women. What she ignores is the obvious fact that the police arrest mainly
men. So, if Kate Millet had had a fully functional (= male ?) brain, she
would have been forced to say that the male police were acting as the
servants of a Matriarchal state -- oppressing men !
I have not proved the case that women are dumb. This would
require lengthy research, and the conditions for such research would be hard
to find in Western academia. Even the ludicrous examples (above) of Feminist
lies/stupidities could be explained as mere wishful thinking in a totalitarian-Feminist
intellectual climate where the media and educational systems do not give Men's
Rights activists the right of reply to ludicrous Feminist assertions.
In addition, one could sensibly ask why men have gone along
with all these stupidities, or lies. Are men just as stupid as women ? Certainly,
it would be foolish to deny that lots of men are stupid, but I think the main
factor here is the wimpishness of the Western male in the face of a lying
or stupid Feminist. The jury is still out on the question that this article
7 August 2015