>>7463503Bell curve for male median IQ has longer tails (larger SD) while the female bell curve has shorter tails. Meaning? Men can spread out over a further range and reach a higher peak that women can, hence all the 130-150 IQ autistes out there, while women, yes they can be smart, they often are not wired to tackle a single field of study at the intensity men can. They're genetically predisposed to a more concentrated strata, and that would be why you see less hyper-intellegent females, less absolutely retarded females, with the exception of niggers that is, and more women of 'average' intelligence. It doesnt take much to do STEM shit either, maybe 115-120 is where most engineers land, lab scientists probably a little higher. But the point of this autistic rant is, yes, hyper intelligence seems to be a male trait while women seem hit a glass ceiling even when they have say a male lineage dotted with markers that would suggest they should be getting a higher base-score from their parents.
Also miss me with that environmental determinism garbage. Everyone knows that you get your brains from your parents. The twin study played at the University of Minnesota did this well, as well as the renewed(ish) search for the "smart gene" which low and behold Nat Geo did an article a few years back churning up fears that the findings of any such study could and would then be used by evil racists to justify their world view... but they aren't wrong are they?
