Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (171882)	10/5/2005 8:42:12 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I notice you didn't comment on the crucial point, which is that women's brains finish growing about 3 years younger than male brains and what effect that might have on finished ability in comparison with brains which have had another 3 years of construction time. Michelle Wie is sixteen years old, but she is acting, playing and talking like Tiger Woods was when he turned 21. This does not mean that Michelle will be better than Tiger when she turns 21. It only shows that Women (girls) development start earlier than men (boys). Your question then is "do boys ever really ever catch up?". My guess is that learning and developing earlier in life is more important than later in life. The development of It is going to make human brain development largely irrelevant, At least in memorizing stuff. Google can remember a lot more than any human. But google still can't sing, dance, make a funny face, or tell me something new, original, never said before, and that makes sense. Arguing over male versus female is like arguing on a scale of 0 to 1,000,000 whether males and females are both on 7, or are females on average only on 6? OR Arguing over male versus female is like arguing on a scale of 0 to 1,000,000 whether males and females are both on 7, or are males on average only on 6? I agree it is not all that relevant.