Why is there a girls only mathematics olympiad in Europe?
>>7925683
to promote females in mathematics
>>7925683
To encourage more women to enter STEM fields so as to increase the STEM labour force and meet growing demands for STEM workers. Read an HR report once in a while, you might find them pretty interesting.
why do you care. if i start a me-only video game club in my room, what the fuck does it have to do with you
What's the problem with IMO in that regard?
>>7925696
Most biologists are female, and math physics and chemistry are pretty even. Why do they generalize shit statistics that only apply to engeea and comp scientists
>>7925705
Again, I suggest you read an HR report. But yes I should have been more specific. More women are needed in engineering and computer science in order to meet growing labour demands. I have a habit of saying STEM instead of specifically engineering or compsci just cause it's a bigger buzzword.
>>7925705
>math physics and chemistry
m8 I'm not even a liberal quota-enforcer, but physics is overwhelming male. I haven't checked out math/chem grad depts, but I'm under the impression it's more even in chem, maybe a little more in math. Physics I can tell you outright the difference between the number of male and female students at the grad level is staggering.
>>7925722
The last shit I read was something about 60/40, though I don't think it accounted for PhDs
>>7925697
But a club is not a competition.
By narrowing the groups of people that may compete literally destroys competition.
Lets say I make a competition for who can count to the highest number. Then I make it a male only competition. Then I restrict it to only hispanics. Then I restrict it to only people whose IQ is <= to mine. Then I restrict it to me.
WOW I WIN WITHOUT DOING NOTHING!
See what happened there? Think of it as a limit. The more I restrict the entrance, the less I have to do to win. In the first competition I would have had to count more than anyone else in the world, including people with higher IQs so maybe I would have had to put a lot of fucking effort. After reducing it to only people with lower IQs I only have to work as I would usually do. Then as I restricted it to only myself, I don't have to work at all. I just win.
To bring back to the girl competition. There may be a male kid that is really good at math and for a girl to win the genderless competition, that girl would have to put her all into beating that kid who has a 300 IQ or whatever. By restricting the genders the 300 IQ male kid will now never participate so now the best girl in maths won't have to work as hard or even push herself because a large part of the actual competitors have simply been excluded.
So basically, what is the fucking point?
If I made a white only basketball league would you be proud of the team that wins in that league? Fuck no, because they are ignoring a large chunk of good players like those who may be black or asian, just to make it easier for them (white people) to win.
Basically, this is fucking stupid.
>>7925735
nah, basically you are really fucking stupid. -1. how about you worry about your own incapable ass than trying to drag others down to your level. thumbs down, unfollowed and saged
>>7925683
>Why are there separate sports teams for males and females?
>>7925740
Drag down? I'm trying to pull them up. If a girl is truly good at math (and by good I mean good enough to win a competition, so pretty arbitrary) then she would beat anyone who competes.
Think about the white only basketball league because I think that highlights how wrong this is. To exclude a group of people only to add notoriety to the achievements of another group of people.
>unfollowed
Well, at least you are not afraid of just coming out as a tumblrtard who made this thread just to argue with everyone and then backtracking pretending it is us, the raging sexists, who want to debate these kind of things.
>>7925735
That's exactly my point, Sauermann competed amongst the greatest math students and succeeded. Isn't that the point of math olympiads? To compete with the best ones in the field, regardless of their gender?
>>7925742
Are you implying that girls cannot be as smart as men?
PLS MODS DELETE THIS FUCKING THREAD BEFORE THE TUMBLRTARD SCREENSHOTS THIS AND BEGINS SCIGATE OR SOME SHIT BLAMING ALL THE CHANS OF BEING RAGING SEXISTS AND THEN HAVING 4CHAN HIRE SAFETY CURATORS OR SOME BULLSHIT LIKE TO APPEASE THE RAGING FEMINISTS.
>>7925747
Are you implying that girls can be as athletic as men?
>>7925683
Who cares?
>>7925752
Math is not a physical sport. What stops women from being good at math?
>>7925762
Nobody wants to find out.
>>7925752
It's a different case. It makes sense to separate between men and women in sports that involve some sort of physical hability, given the natural disadvantage of women. Mathematics, however does not fall under such category.
>>7925762
Mental barriers. It might be true that grills are smarter than men ON AVERAGE but there are very few grills that are extremely smart whereas there are a lot of men that are extremely smart.
>>7925744
you are trying to apply the logic of a really bad sociologist to people studying real sciences. this is sci, take it to pol
>>7925762
Competitions like those that keep trying to pull them down, while they could be just as good as one of the best IMO contestants of all time.
>>7925722
Math is almost entirely male at the grad level too.
>>7925772
Mental barriers like what? You are just making shit up.
>>7925776
Look, I really don't care. If you feel good winning a competition where the entrance was exclusively limited to people inside your group then you have low standards of achievement. I suppose you have learned how to live with that and someone like me will never understand what it feels to be mediocre.
>>7925777
Indeed it is a sad state of affairs. Feminism has polluted women so much. Before 3rd wave feminism no one would have thought of girl only STEM clubs, girl only STEM competitions or girl only aid for STEM education.
All that we can hope for is that feminism slowly dies out so that actually strong and actually independent women can join us in the horizon.
>>7925790
It is empirically evident that grills and women are simply not capable of thinking abstractly on a high level. Evolutionary they had to focus solely on choosing the correct mate to ensure the maintenance of the race; this obviously has not anything to do with analytical and abstract thinking. "men and women are equally talented in cognitive disciplines/women are better at it" faggots BTFO
>>7925799
Women developed sexual features to attract men and vice versa.
There is nothing in the Y chromosome that just boots up your brain.
Our brains evolved with each other and we share literally the same genetic information that make up our brains
>w-well different chemicals...
[CITATION [CITATION [CITATION NEEDED] NEEDED] NEEDED]
>>7925799
It is empirically evident that one of the best IMO contestants of all time is a girl. Must I also cite the names of other prominent female scientists? BTFO already
>>7925799
Women has less natural selection pressure than men. There would always men who would fuck them no matter how ugly or stupid they are mean while being a man mean that you have to compete with other men to get women and you may not even get the chance to spread your seed, not to even mention men usually do more dangerous work. Wonder how all the dumber men go? They are all dead/not born because their would-be fathers are stupid.
>>7925816
Are women more choosy when it comes to sexual partners because the amount of sex cell they can provide is much more limited than the amount of men's sex cells?
>>7925716
>More women are needed in engineering and computer science in order to meet growing labour demands.
Not according to anything I've read on /sci/.
The general consensus seems to be that STEM degrees are outstripping STEM jobs.
(bonus points if you can name the unused degree pic related holds)
>>7925821
In the worst case if the women is a fucking ugly loser there would be some men who fuck them because "men are less choosy" and they are still in the gene pool. Women are more choosy therefore dumber men of the population get less chance to reproduce while smarter and stronger men get more women. As a loser, if your are a men, you are mostly done for but if you're a women you have less trouble to pass on your gene.
>>7925762
>What stops women from being good at math?
>>7925836
>the female line is continuous
You would have a point if the graph showed that at some point, the amount of women with that IQ was literally 0 and the graph just vanished but that is not the case.
So while trying to prove your sexist point, you ended up proving my humanist point?
I guess what they say is right. When you have the right opinion, winning arguments is as easy as 1 2 3.
>>7925816
Damn, your shit would be a lot more convincing if you could put together a sentence.
>>7925846
Not that everyone has English as their mother tongue kek. Personal attacks dont make my point less valid.
>>7925849
Your points might be valid, yet you are not capable of getting them across, you filthy faggot. So we can not verify whether your arguments are valid.
>>7925841
>You would have a point if the graph showed that at some point, the amount of women with that IQ was literally 0 and the graph just vanished but that is not the case.
Considering there's no scale on the chart, I have a hard telling who's the bigger fag, me or you.
Either way the point should be clear.
Men have a higher standard deviation than women when it comes to IQ.
The most unusually stupid people are predominately men, but the most unusually intelligent people are also predominately men.
>>7925811
>It is empirically evident that one of the best IMO contestants of all time is a girl.
The women's world record for running the mile is 4:12.
That's pretty damn fast.
Hell of a lot faster than I can run.
But the worlds fastest runners are all men.
>>7925854
>Considering there's no scale on the chart
There doesn't need to be. I've already seen such graphs myself. Believe me, you are not unique for holding your belief. There are a couple of other lifelong virgins here on /sci/ that like to argue the same things.
So more men test higher IQs? Well... good for us? That doesn't stop a particular woman from testing the same IQ or even higher so that is a moot point.
If anything that would at best explain why there are less women in STEM but the women that are in STEM are as good at abstract thinking as the men because they got there through the same channels (before third wave feminism appeared. Every PhD granted to a woman after the 2000s was out of pity or heavy dicksucking).
>>7925859
The point made concerned abstract thinking, in which it is made clear that women can succeed just as men. That's a whole different category you're bringing to the game.
>>7925772
>>7925799
You retards do know that before good computers mostly women were employed as number crunchers because it was seen as secretary-tier work right? You do know that most of the first computer scientists were women because of the war right? There has never been a case where a large number of women were given a technical task and flunked it en-masse. They are every bit as capable as men. I hate how a group not doing something is cited as evidence that they are not good at it.
>>7925863
>abstract thinking, in which it is made clear that women can succeed just as men.
[citation needed]
Your belief is based on political expediency, not evidence.
>>7925941
Must I really spam this girl all over this thread? Besides, how do you explain female scientists? Did they transcend their "mental barriers" or there was really no such thing to begin with?
>>7926845
She is more intelligent than me, but the best scientists are male.
Deal with it.
>>7925683
because they can't compete with males on regular competitions.
>>7926863
The best scientists may be male, I agree with that. My point is that there's no intrisic property to men that make them more intelligent or succesful than women. I believe women are just as capable. The real question is why don't we see more female scientists and mathematicians? Since, the old myth of a superior male brain has been debunked, what's stoping them? Are they willing to suceed? If not, why? Is a girls only math olympiad really the right way to raise interest in the field?
>>7926845
who is she, and why would you spam her?
I'd love to debunk your shit.
>>7926894
https://www.imo-official.org/hall.aspx
Third name.
>>7926911
>imo
you're for real nigger???? This is shit tier.
what contribution has she made? Why does this prove females can compete with males? For all we know she has more testosterone in her bloodstream than the other women.
This is anecdotal evidence at best.
unlike the dozens of other males in that list, and the absence of females in that same list. In fact that's the evidence YOU should be looking at.
get a fucking grip on reality.
>>7926922
Have you even read the whole thread? It's about MATH OLYMPIADS. I believe being on the hall of fame of one of the hardest math competitions in the world is proof that women are capable of competing with men, you don't? What's with that testosterone shit you're bringing up?
>>7925831
>>More women are needed in engineering and computer science in order to meet growing labour demands.
>Not according to anything I've read on /sci/.
At work we have been trying to recruit someone with a solid basis in STEM. Well paid. No joy so far. Also you get more progress by doing R&D and STEM than by buying cosmetics and hanging out in malls.
>The general consensus seems to be that STEM degrees are outstripping STEM jobs.
First off the need is greater than the jobs offered. A bit academic, perhaps. Anyways there are positions but nearly all STEM jobs are very unglamourous.
>(bonus points if you can name the unused degree pic related holds)
Astrophysics. PhD. What do I win?
>>7925716
>engineering
>growing labour demands
Yeah man, we need 10e100 more women in engineering because we need to accomodate for that 1% job growth in most engineering fields!
>watching /sci/ slowly but surely turn into /r9k/
>>7927669
/sci/ is a proto-/r9k/
