Home > Issues > Humanities & Natural & Social Sciences > New Scientist's War on the Truth
	Empowering Men: fighting feminist lies
The New Scientist's War on the Truth © Peter Zohrab 2011

 

A Feminist reviews two Feminist books

As soon as you give a woman a job, she proceeds to use it to oppress men.  Now that journalism is female-dominated, it is just another front line in the war on men.  The popular magazine New Scientist, for example, has dumbed down its contents (e.g. more brief articles) and introduced an editorial section and an "Opinion" column, where (as if by accident!) the only political views allowed will be leftist and Feminist ones.  On their editorial page, I remember seeing it use the word "NOT" in capital letters to emphasise that women were not inferior (by some measure of intellectual capacity or other).

Page 42 of its 4 September 2010 issue is dominated by the headline "Waging war on neurosexism", with the subheading, "If you thought the differences between the sexes were hard-wired, think again".  The Feminazi politburo issues its command.

Underneath that headline, we find two book reviews -- and it will surprise no one to see that both books are by women and that the reviewer is also a woman.  With typical Femifascism, the reviewer contemplates "calling for a moratorium on popular books about differences between the sexes."  Why doesn't she just call for books that she disagrees with to be burnt, and be done with it?   However, she is reassured that the two "popular books about differences between the sexes" which she is reviewing follow the Feminist party line -- and, of course, she knows that calling for a moratorium on books on this topic would be counterproductive, since everyone would realise that Feminists were afraid of the truth. 

The reviews do not enlighten the reader about the the actual differences between the sexes, however. Unfortunately, we will just have to read the books, if we want to evaluate them!

 

Counter-evidence slips in under the radar

On page 25 of its 31 July 2010 edition, New Scientist had already provided evidence against the Feminist party line.  An interview with Professor Richard Haier, who "uses neuroimaging to study cognitive processes and intelligence", states that "What we are finding is that a person's score in tests of analytical reasoning, memory and spatial and numerical abilities is indeed related to the amount of grey matter in different areas of their brain."  Given that it is well-known that men's brains are 10% bigger than women's brains (Dekaban & Sadowsky 1978), and that men have proportionately more grey matter than women, the potential implications for the relative mental abilities of men and women are clear.  Witelson, Kigar and Harvey 1999 cite Wickett, Vernon and Lee 1994 as having shown a low, but significant, positive correlation between brain volume and IQ scores (in females).   According to Witelson, Glezer & Kigar 1995, Peters 1991 found very low correlations between brain and body size variables in male and female groups, so men don't have bigger brains just because they have bigger bodies.

Women have proportionately more white matter, which is not surprising, since men's brains have more lateral specialisation, and require less communication between various parts of the brain (which is the role of white matter) in order to carry out certain types of mental activities.   Witelson, Glezer & Kigar 1995 cite findings that the interhemispheric commissures, including the isthmus of the corpus callosum, are larger in women than in men.  On the other hand, there is at least one part of the brain where women appear to have 11% more neurons in a given volume of cortex (Witelson, Glezer & Kigar 1995).  However, neurons constitute only one of the many types of brain cells that exist, and we don't know that densely-packed neurons are as efficient as (or more efficient than) less densely-packed neurons, as far as I am aware.  Witelson, Glezer & Kigar 1995 suggest that the 11% greater density of neurons in female brains (if repeated all over the cortex) compensates and accounts for the 10% greater size of male brains.  However, this appears to overlook the fact that (as the authors themselves state) the average man's cortical volume for the part of the brain they studied was 22% greater than that of a woman, so women's 11% greater neuron density does not compensate for men's 22% greater cortical volume even in the area of the brains which the authors studied.

Lynn 1994 confirms that "Males have larger brains than females, even when corrected for body size," and that males have IQs 4 points higher than females.  However, it is not obvious that what IQ tests measure comprises all and only the higher mental abilities which are relevant to human behaviour.  IQ tests are based on an a priori categorisation and error-prone testing of presumed mental "faculties" of various types, and have little empirical justification.  See: Psychologists and Women Don't Have the Brains to Study Intelligence.

 

Conclusion

The one vital conclusion that can be arrived at is that women who use their jobs to oppress men should be kicked out of their jobs.  Feminists worry that scientific results that showed that women were inferior to men would be used for "improper purposes."  There would be nothing "improper" about making sure that the best person got a particular job -- even if that tended to be a man.  Women are already admitted to be physically inferior to men -- and what happens?  What happens is that double standards are set up which discriminate against men by allowing women to, for example, enter the US Marines and the New Zealand Police , when men are rejected if their physical performance is as low as the minimum female standard! 

Every aspect of Society is corrupted by the political Feminist demand for female privilege.  Responding to this vicious form of anti-male discrimination is an urgent political priority.

 

References

Dekaban, A.S. & Sadowsky, D. (1978), Changes in brain weights during the span of human life: relation of brain weights to body heights and body weights, Ann Neurol 4:345-356.

Lynn, R. (1994), Sex Differences in Intelligence and Brain Size: A Paradox Resolved, Person Individ Diff Vol 17, No. 2, 257-271, 1994.

Peters, M. (1991), Sex differences in human brain size and the general meaning of differences in brain size,  Can J Psychol 45:507-522.

Wickett, J.C., Vernon, P.A., and Lee, D.H. (1994), In vivo brain size, head perimeter, and intelligence in a sample of healthy adult females, Person Individ Diff1994; 16: 831-38.

Witelson, S.F., Glezer, I.I., & Kigar, D.L. (1995), Women Have Greater Density of Neurons in Posterior Temporal Cortex, The Journal of Neuroscience, May 1995, 15(5): 3418-3428.

Witelson, S.F., Kigar, D.L. and Harvey, T., (1999), The exceptional brain of Albert Einstein, The Lancet, Vol. 353, June 19, 1999.

 

See also:

Home Issues Links FAQ Book Quotes Lawyers Email us ! SiteMap

Webmaster Peter Douglas Zohrab Latest Update 19 July 2021

Top