Who is really smarter boys or girls????????

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Anonymous

Guest
Feel free to comment on the essay and to say whom do you think smarter and why?



“Who are Smarter- Boys or Girls?”



A worldwide controversy is the notion of who are smarter boys or girls .Some people claims that boys are smarter than girls are in every aspect of life while others argue that girls are more intelligent than boys .Every type of those supports his point of view..


Boys are smarter because they are physically stronger, the first group maintains. Their bodies are capable of bearing hard works; such as building .It is very difficult for women to build a house under the hot beams of the sun .This, in turn, qualify boys to be more intelligent because they will have more experience and they will learn a great deal from it.

Although girls are physically weak, they overcome boys mentally, claims the other group. According to a recent research, girls have strong memories that enable them to be better at spelling than boys. The research found out that a nerve in the left side of the brain grows faster in girls than in boys. This nerve is responsible for making girls more intelligent in their early stage in their lives.

However, boys excel in science and math. Since males are goal-oriented, they show a surpassing ability in solving problems. Whenever you talk to a man, about a problem you have or even a political issue, he immediately resorts to giving solutions though you were chatting .He is very practical. It seems that he has an overwhelming tendency to reasoning and solving problems.


On the other hand, girls generally are more successful in arts .They always score high grades in literature courses. The reason behind that is the girls’ emotions are intense and very well nurtured. Because girls have a wonderful ability of sharing experience, they are successful in literature courses. A novel, for example, is an experience that the novelist had. Since boys lack the ability of sharing an experience, most of them find it difficult to cope with those courses.

Boys are goal-oriented, which means that they tend to reason. Their nature forced them to be reasoning creatures. A conversation should have a purpose that is worth considering. Men do not indulge in a useless chat over the phone for several hours for no aim.

Girls, on the other hand, are process-oriented. They narrate what happens not for a purpose other than sharing the experience with a partner. They do not look for solutions like men. For example, men find women’s talk over the phone for several hours boring while women enjoy this because they are telling their story in order to share it with somebody else. They do not seek solutions. You rarely see a woman suggesting a solution to another unless the other asks for it.


Boys are more intelligent than girls are in the outside world. Boys are better at playing out-dooring games. Since boys are almost all the time out of the house playing with the neighboring kids, they know how to play soccer. They know how to deal with other kids if ever they have a fight. They also know directions. For instance, they know where a certain shop is located from the first time they have been there. Girls visit the same shop many times, but they do not know its whereabouts.

Girls are smarter in the domestic arena. They are excellent cooks. They know how to dress properly. They also know how to take care of an infant. In general, they can handle all the homely affairs.


Ultimately, boys do extremely well in the fields where physical and reasoning powers are most likely needed. In the opposite, girls excel in the arenas that require emotions and a strong memory.





Reference:

Ilona Leki, Academic Writing. P. 367, Cambridge, second edition.
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
Do you have any facts to back up your opinions? In any case, Cas is going to come by and chop up your arguments. :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
Commentary.

“Who are Smarter- Boys or Girls?”

That should be "Who is smarter: boys or girls?" You are, in a sense, comparing two things, so use is.

A worldwide controversy is the notion of who are smarter boys or girls .Some people claims that boys are smarter than girls are in every aspect of life while others argue that girls are more intelligent than boys .Every type of those supports his point of view..

A controversy and a notion are two different things. (Use about or over with controversy.) Perhaps:
  • A worldwide controversy has been brewing over whether girls or boys are smarter. Some claim that boys are smarter than girls in every way, while others argue that girls are more intelligent than boys.

:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
Boys are smarter because they are physically stronger, the first group maintains. Their bodies are capable of bearing hard works; such as building .It is very difficult for women to build a house under the hot beams of the sun .This, in turn, qualify boys to be more intelligent because they will have more experience and they will learn a great deal from it.

The first sentence is fine (although the argument is dubious). The second sentence is a mess. You have somehow managed to separate them from their bodies. (No mean feat!) What you mean to say is that males are stronger and have more endurance than females. They (males) can lift heavier loads and can work harder longer. The third sentence seem to be making the argument that men find it very easy to build a house in the hot sun. Grammatically, the last sentence is perfectly fine, but to say that something qualifies somebody to be intelligent is to say something nonsensical. You can't be qualified to be intelligent. Intelligence is itself a quality.

:eek:

:roll:

:roll:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
Although girls are physically weak, they overcome boys mentally, claims the other group.

  • Although girls are not as strong as boys, they are smarter than boys, claims the other group.

If you register, we won't have to keep referring to you as Guest. :wink:

:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
According to a recent research, girls have strong memories that enable them to be better at spelling than boys. The research found out that a nerve in the left side of the brain grows faster in girls than in boys. This nerve is responsible for making girls more intelligent in their early stage in their lives.

  • According to recent research, girls have strong memories that enable them to be better at spelling than boys. The research found out that a nerve on the left side of the brain grows faster in girls than in boys. This nerve is responsible for making girls more intelligent in the early stages of their lives.

What research? What nerve? Is that "nerve theory" consistent with what is known about brain anatomy?

However, boys excel in science and math. Since males are goal-oriented, they show a surpassing ability in solving problems. Whenever you talk to a man, about a problem you have or even a political issue, he immediately resorts to giving solutions though you were chatting .He is very practical. It seems that he has an overwhelming tendency to reasoning and solving problems.

  • Boys are better than girls in both science and math. Since males are goal-oriented, they show a surpassing ability in solving problems. Whenever you talk to a man about a problem he will offer a solution. Men are practical. Men are good at reasoning and solving problems.

I see opinions but nothing to back them up. You suggest that women are not goal-oriented and are not good at solving problems, but you offer no evidence to support that assertion.

:roll:
:roll:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
H

HardRock

Guest
Quote:
“Who are Smarter- Boys or Girls?”


That should be "Who is smarter: boys or girls?" You are, in a sense, comparing two things, so use is.


It is a quote .And I think he/she used it to trigger the readers attention and I like this kind of technique.




Quote:
A worldwide controversy is the notion of who are smarter boys or girls .Some people claims that boys are smarter than girls are in every aspect of life while others argue that girls are more intelligent than boys .Every type of those supports his point of view..


A controversy and a notion are two different things. (Use about or over with controversy.)

I think a controversy is an idea or a notion. However, I have to admit that the sentence you suggested is better that mine.







Quote:
Boys are smarter because they are physically stronger, the first group maintains. Their bodies are capable of bearing hard works; such as building .It is very difficult for women to build a house under the hot beams of the sun .This, in turn, qualify boys to be more intelligent because they will have more experience and they will learn a great deal from it.


The first sentence is fine (although the argument is dubious).

The second sentence is a mess. You have somehow managed to separate them from their bodies. (No mean feat!) What you mean to say is that males are stronger and have more endurance than females. ( I MEAN THAT MALES HAVE MORE PHSYCAL ENDURANCE THAN FEMALES .)

They (males) can lift heavier loads and can work harder longer. The third sentence seem to be making the argument that men find it very easy to build a house in the hot sun. Grammatically, the last sentence is perfectly fine, but to say that something qualifies somebody to be intelligent is to say something nonsensical. You can't be qualified to be intelligent. Intelligence is itself a quality.
What I meant is that they will learn a lot because they will witness and experience things that the females do have the opportunity to learn. Consequently, if we get an experienced male and an inexperienced female ( as it is common in my country ) to build a house who do you think will be able to perform better ?




What research? What nerve? Is that "nerve theory" consistent with what is known about brain anatomy?
Well, I have read this in an article titled “Scientists Probe the Roots of Abilities That Seem Linked t Sex “ and

many scientists believe this to be true.




I see opinions but nothing to back them up. You suggest that women are not goal-oriented and are not good at solving problems, but you offer no evidence to support that assertion.



I HAVE GIVEN MY OPINION AND THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED AS A PERSONAL EXPERIENCE BY WHICH I SUPPORT MY ARGUMENT WITH.
Do you have any suggestions about other techniques I can use or examples to boost my argument?
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
A controversy is an argument. Something that is controversial is something people argue about.

That males have greater endurance than females is not an argument for their intelligence. (You don't need to add "physical" to "endurance".) Do you have any data to link intelligence and strength?

Consequently, if we get an experienced male and an inexperienced female ( as it is common in my country ) to build a house who do you think will be able to perform better ?

That would not be a test of intelligence. That would test the benefits of experience. If you would compare an experienced male to an inexperienced male who would you expect to perform better? Would it be a test of intelligence?

Intelligence is the ability to learn. It is also the ability to solve problems. If you wish to test the relative intelligence of two groups of people, you have to give them similar tests.

The statement "many scientists believe this to be true" is not evidence.

An opinion is not experience. You could offer a story from your experience to back up your opinon, however.
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
HardRock said:
“Who are Smarter- Boys or Girls?”

It is a quote. And I think he/she used it to trigger the readers attention and I like this kind of technique.

Well, if it's a quote, it'd be best to modify it--otherwise it serves only to weaken the argument that boys are stronger at grammar than girls.


RonBee said:
What you mean to say is that males are stronger and have more endurance than females.

Hardrock said:
I MEAN THAT MALES HAVE MORE PHSYCAL ENDURANCE THAN FEMALES.

The terms 'male' and 'female' would be best given that 'boys' rarely build houses. Speaking of physical endurance, it's a known scientific fact that females are more likely to survive the cold temperature of the sea when shipwrecked. In terms of physical attributes, males lack the body fat required to sustain such cold temperatures. I'd add in giving birth, but all things considered, the male body is not made to endure that physical feat. But, mind you, leaving that bit out kind of makes your argument one-sided. That is, you seem to be comparing women to men rather than comparing women and men.

Hardrock said:
What I meant is that they will learn a lot because they will witness and experience things that the females do have the opportunity to learn. Consequently, if we get an experienced male and an inexperienced female ( as it is common in my country ) to build a house who do you think will be able to perform better ?

Well now, that's why the argument is dubious. Culture plays a major part here. Men and women are capable of different roles in other countries.

RonBee said:
What research? What nerve? Is that "nerve theory" consistent with what is known about brain anatomy?

Hardrock said:
Well, I have read this in an article titled “Scientists Probe the Roots of Abilities That Seem Linked t Sex“ and many scientists believe this to be true.

The problem is not what the scientists believe; the problem is that the readers have not read the article and so they have no idea what 'nerve theory' is about or how it strengthens your argument.

Hardrock said:
I HAVE GIVEN MY OPINION AND THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED AS A PERSONAL EXPERIENCE BY WHICH I SUPPORT MY ARGUMENT WITH.

You have given your personal opinions, yes; but, you've yet to convince your reader that your opinions are worth considering. 50% of your readers are female. :D
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
Some men don't lack the body fat, suely? ;-)
 
H

HardRock

Guest
Casiopea said:
tdol said:
Some men don't lack the body fat, suely? ;-)

I was hoping for Hardrock to comment on that first.

:D :D Stop callin' me sue :D :D
HardRock wrote:

“Who are Smarter- Boys or Girls?”

It is a quote. And I think he/she used it to trigger the readers attention and I like this kind of technique.


Well, if it's a quote, it'd be best to modify it--otherwise it serves only to weaken the argument that boys are stronger at grammar than girls


Well, it is conspicuous that girls are better than boys are at grammar. I know girls they are excellent language –learners, at least the girls I have met. If they are not, why girls speak before boys then?



RonBee wrote:
What you mean to say is that males are stronger and have more endurance than females.

Hardrock wrote:
I MEAN THAT MALES HAVE MORE PHSYCAL ENDURANCE THAN FEMALES.


The terms 'male' and 'female' would be best given that 'boys' rarely build houses. Speaking of physical endurance, it's a known scientific fact that females are more likely to survive the cold temperature of the sea when shipwrecked. In terms of physical attributes, males lack the body fat required to sustain such cold temperatures. I'd add in giving birth, but all things considered, the male body is not made to endure that physical feat. But, mind you, leaving that bit out kind of makes your argument one-sided. That is, you seem to be comparing women to men rather than comparing women and men.


This is another piece of information that I can add to my essay later simply because females have certain points of strengths and males have that too. I think that characteristic is given to women by God to be able to bear the pains and suffering of giving birth.

However, and to be neutral I don’t like to dig deep into science and say that there is certain hormone in the males that encourage them to seek out powerful positions in the political and social arenas . I ruled that out simply because I did not want to be biased with either party. It is well known that the majority of political positions are occupied with males in countries that even give opportunity for women to seek political positions. A certain study showed that in females a certain hormone that deters females from acquiring a high position in any hemisphere. If I were asked what was that hormone I would really admit that it is called serotonin.




Hardrock wrote:
What I meant is that they will learn a lot because they will witness and experience things that the females do have the opportunity to learn. Consequently, if we get an experienced male and an inexperienced female ( as it is common in my country ) to build a house who do you think will be able to perform better ?


Well now, that's why the argument is dubious. Culture plays a major part here. Men and women are capable of different roles in other countries.

That ‘s right that what was driving at. My audience, LET’S SAY Ronbee is not the kind of audience I was writing to .I was writing to somebody who shares the same background.



RonBee wrote:
What research? What nerve? Is that "nerve theory" consistent with what is known about brain anatomy?

Hardrock wrote:
Well, I have read this in an article titled “Scientists Probe the Roots of Abilities That Seem Linked t Sex“ and many scientists believe this to be true.


The problem is not what the scientists believe; the problem is that the readers have not read the article and so they have no idea what 'nerve theory' is about or how it strengthens your argument.


This is another problem of my audience .I was supposed to write to someone who is well aware of this research i.e. my prof .
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
HardRock said:
“Who are Smarter- Boys or Girls?”

The problem with the quote is that it doesn't make any sense.

"Who are smarter?" These groups of boys or these groups of girls? :shock: It should be "Who is smarter?" This group of boys or this group of girls? :D

HardRock said:
..., why girls speak before boys then?

Anthropologists attribute it to culture, specifically child rearing practices: young females are expected to do more in the home--they learn to communicate early on, whereas young males are not expected to do as much until they leave home--they learn to communicate later on.

HardRock said:
This is another piece of information that I can add to my essay later simply because females have certain points of strengths and males have that too. I think that characteristic is given to women by God to be able to bear the pains and suffering of giving birth.

Good point :D. You may, however, want to consider changing God to something like by Nature.

Hardrock said:
However, and to be neutral I don’t like to dig deep into science and say that there is certain hormone in the males that encourage them to seek out powerful positions in the political and social arenas . I ruled that out simply because I did not want to be biased with either party. It is well known that the majority of political positions are occupied with males in countries that even give opportunity for women to seek political positions. A certain study showed that in females a certain hormone that deters females from acquiring a high position in any hemisphere. If I were asked what was that hormone I would really admit that it is called serotonin.

Now that's a fabulous point :D Social scientists have shown that in elementary school, female math scores are higher than male maths scores, yet when females enter junior high school their math scores significantly drop--this has been observed in both western and eastern cultures across the board; that drop is attributed--according to social scientists--to puberty: females don't want to compete with males; they want to marry them. :shock: Again, culture, not IQ, plays a major role here. Females have the drive, they redirect it at puberty towards seeking out powerful positions as mates of successful providers for the sole sake of their future fecundity. Consider this, how many nerdy girls had boyfriends in school?


Hardrock said:
What I meant is that they will learn a lot because they will witness and experience things that the females do have the opportunity to learn. Consequently, if we get an experienced male and an inexperienced female (as it is common in my country) to build a house who do you think will be able to perform better ?

First, females in your country are not given the opportunity to learn to build houses, so, you see, you're not giving them the fair shake here. Second, the experienced are always the more preferred, sans gender, unless that is the inexperiened is a husband with a family to support. Take for example that in Asian cultures females are traditionally the household accountants. They keep the books; they decide where and when to spend the money. No consider that in cultures wherein males are preferred over females in the business sector, whom do you think X accouting company would hire the experienced housewife or the inexperienced husband if they had an accounting position open? Given that in such cultures it's the husband's role to support the family, the husband would most likely get the job, inexperienced and all. They'd train him. So you see experience really has no meaning when it comes to gender issues. Culture will determine the selection every time.

Hardrock said:
That ‘s right that what was driving at. My audience, LET’S SAY Ronbee is not the kind of audience I was writing to .I was writing to somebody who shares the same background.

That's a really important point :D You should state that in your title or within the body of your essay.

Hardrock said:
This is another problem of my audience .I was supposed to write to someone who is well aware of this research i.e. my prof .

Ok. Well then you should at least outline the 'nerve theory' then so as to show your prof that you've read and understand the issue. Simply naming the 'theory' doesn't do much.

:D
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
HardRock said:
A certain study showed that in females a certain hormone that deters females from acquiring a high position in any hemisphere.

I find this study a bit strange- did they test Margaret Thatcher and Benazir Butto for serotonin levels? Women are underepresented, but there are many who have got to the top. Interestingly, this is often in more traditional cultures, too. Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanks, India, etc, have all been led by women, while American is still wondering whether Hilary Clinton will be ready to stand in a couple of terms' time. ;-)
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
AE: run for office
BE: stand for office

:wink:
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
We do occasionally say 'run', but 'stand' is more common. ;-)
 
H

HardRock

Guest
Ronbee Wrote:



Grammatically, the last sentence is perfectly fine, but to say that something qualifies somebody to be intelligent is to say something nonsensical. You can't be qualified to be intelligent. Intelligence is itself a quality.

I think that intelligence can be developed through practicing and other means. It is just like an ordinary organ that develops over time. Do you think that you are as intelligent as when you were a young baby?




TDOL Wrote:

I find this study a bit strange- did they test Margaret Thatcher and Benazir Butto for serotonin levels? Women are underepresented, but there are many who have got to the top. Interestingly, this is often in more traditional cultures, too. Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanks, India, etc, have all been led by women, while American is still wondering whether Hilary Clinton will be ready to stand in a couple of terms' time.


Yes, it is true that there are some women who are/ were leaders, but they are so rare compared to male leaders. :eek: :wink:
 
H

HardRock

Guest
Ronbee Wrote:



Grammatically, the last sentence is perfectly fine, but to say that something qualifies somebody to be intelligent is to say something nonsensical. You can't be qualified to be intelligent. Intelligence is itself a quality.

I think that intelligence can be developed through practicing and other means. It is just like an ordinary organ that develops over time. Do you think that you are as intelligent as when you were a young baby?




TDOL Wrote:

I find this study a bit strange- did they test Margaret Thatcher and Benazir Butto for serotonin levels? Women are underepresented, but there are many who have got to the top. Interestingly, this is often in more traditional cultures, too. Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanks, India, etc, have all been led by women, while American is still wondering whether Hilary Clinton will be ready to stand in a couple of terms' time.


Yes, it is true that there are some women who are/ were leaders, but they are so rare compared to male leaders. :eek: :wink:
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
Yes, intelligence can be developed, just as any quality or attribute can be developed, but that has no bearing on the other statement. There isn't anything that can qualify a person to be intelligent. Indeed, a person has to have intelligence for there to be anything to be developed. A person must be capable of learning before that person can be taught.

:)
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
HardRock said:
Ronbee Wrote:



Grammatically, the last sentence is perfectly fine, but to say that something qualifies somebody to be intelligent is to say something nonsensical. You can't be qualified to be intelligent. Intelligence is itself a quality.

I think that intelligence can be developed through practicing and other means. It is just like an ordinary organ that develops over time. Do you think that you are as intelligent as when you were a young baby?




TDOL Wrote:

I find this study a bit strange- did they test Margaret Thatcher and Benazir Butto for serotonin levels? Women are underepresented, but there are many who have got to the top. Interestingly, this is often in more traditional cultures, too. Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanks, India, etc, have all been led by women, while American is still wondering whether Hilary Clinton will be ready to stand in a couple of terms' time.


Yes, it is true that there are some women who are/ were leaders, but they are so rare compared to male leaders. :eek: :wink:

In some countries in Europe, female political representation is nearly 50% and female leaders, government members, etc, are common enough not to attract any attention. ;-)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top