Here we have an issue that regards multiple intelligences.
Howard Gardner, a Ph.D and professor at Harvard University asserts that there are 8 kinds of intelligence, shown as follows:

Linguistic intelligence: a sensitivity to the meaning and order of words.
Logical-mathematical intelligence: ability in mathematics and other complex logical systems.
Musical intelligence: the ability to understand and create music. Musicians, composers and dancers show a heightened musical intelligence.
Spatial intelligence: the ability to "think in pictures," to perceive the visual world accurately, and recreate (or alter) it in the mind or on paper. Spatial intelligence is highly developed in artists, architects, designers and sculptors.
Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence: the ability to use one's body in a skilled way, for self-expression or toward a goal. Mimes, dancers, basketball players, and actors are among those who display bodily-kinesthetic intelligence.
Interpersonal intelligence: an ability to perceive and understand other individuals -- their moods, desires, and motivations. Political and religious leaders, skilled parents and teachers, and therapists use this intelligence.
Intrapersonal intelligence: an understanding of one's own emotions. Some novelists and or counselors use their own experience to guide others.
Naturalist intelligence: the ability to recognize and classify plants, minerals, and animals, including rocks and grass and all variety of flora and fauna. The ability to recognize cultural artifacts like cars or sneakers may also depend on the naturalist intelligence.


To say that one sex, males, are the smarter of the sexes, because they dominate a scientific or mathematical field is to assert that there is one standard of intelligence--science and math. This is completely untrue.
I think a lot of things have to do with the environment with which you were raised. For instance, my roommate's father is a biology teacher, they live by the ocean and she was allowed to be a "tom-boy", go out and explore the ocean and its creatures. Now she's a biology major in college. My dad was a teacher (he now is a successful entrepreneur, business owner, and real estate owner. kind of like monopoly or something.); my mom studied early childhood development for a while. My brother has special needs, and I worked with people with special needs. My other brother was a huge history fanatic. I am now a history, special education, and secondary education triple major in college.
Why are my roommate and I the way we are? The environment in which we grew up in.

Although my interests lie in a certain field, my ABILITIES do not only lie in that field. I am great at math, solving problems, music (which used to be studied as a math), science-especially biology and chemistry, and given an introduction, I've been told I would do great with programming. Maybe I'll pick it up on the side.
Just because someone's interests lie in a certain area, such as many women's interests may lie in a "people-helping" profession, doesn't mean they are less smart or less capable to do math, science or programming.

If we truly want a good, accurate statistic of women and men's capabilities toward a certain field, be it science, history, counseling, politics or housekeeping, there needs to be an equal playing field. That would mean that all children, regardless of gender, should be encouraged and given the experiences and opportunities to explore all fields of study or career. Men should be equally supported to pursue nursing as they would to pursue engineering. Women should be equally supported to pursue programming as they would to pursue elementary education.
To have any of that happen, there needs to be a societal change. There also needs to be a change in the way people are being paid. Women *STILL* make less than men in the same job, with equal experience and qualifications, and sometimes with the women having more experience and qualifications. Men are given raises and positions of authority more than women in certain jobs/industries, despite qualifications and requirements.


I would say that women and men have the same *capacity* for skills in science or math, but do not have the environment to fully develop those abilities.

Yeah, because we know Scrabble will never be an option.

oh, they were dead.... damn i thought it was going to be an interesting expiriment:)

sorry for i haven't read the whole thread, so if it's already been said just ignore me...

men are more probable to be genious. why? the intelligence "lays" on the X-chromosome. since men have both X and Y, there's only one X that has to be the genious chromosome. women have two X-chromosomes, so both X need to be intelligent. obviously, the gaussian normal distribution is somewhat flattened for men, for women it has a higher peak around 100 (i speak about the IQ here). as a result, there are more ingenious men, but well, also more jerks.

joey.

The studies I've seen have all but ruled out a "genius gene."

Potential intelligence probably does have a lot to do with the genes we are born with, but there isn't a single gene (or even a small group) that would distinguish a genius from a simpleton.

It is probably not a single gene.
But the amount of mutations / off average development has a higher
probability for men, as the genepool is not as static (just one X cromosome)
This also yields a higher probability to have a genetic combination that
creates a genious.

This probably also has an evolutional reasoning.
Men have the higher probability to bear genetic mutations.
So men with a "good" new combination have more offspring in
the competition for sex.
Females are likely to have the same number of offprings as other females.

So the female genepool is better off to have a smaller probability for mutations
than the male genes.