MEN ON TOP W
Anyone who doesn't start a column graph on 0 should be shot
i never took this tesst
>>44040708trannies are just being helped by the genius level agps. look at how wide the error bars are
>>44040716SAT scores don't start at zero either
>people who are bigger targets of discrimination against, are nearly forced to over perform. >"lmfao you man brained cause women stupid and you smart"retard
>>44040748That's from a small sample size dorkass
>>44040748the dumbest tranny brainmogs the smartest afab
>>44040783Oh yeah you're women for sure no doubt about it, we can tell from the scores. So fembrained slay girlie pop yaaas
>>44040708It's unethical to create a graph scaled to where 60 points difference looks like a 1.5x difference
>>44040708>104 enbies>38 FtMs>16 MtFs
>>44040708picrel>>44040748my mind disagrees but my heart (superego) says yes
>>44040784yes exactly, you have a few genius agps with a perfect score that are pulling up the average for all the retard trannies
the sat doesnt matter and intelligence is only interesting when combined with a cool personality and a desire to innovate, otherwise its absolutely obnoxious
>>44040804i also think there should be a total bar and like standard deviations and shit to show what the normal score is bc you can't trust some ppl to account for that
>>44040850holes, well known innovators
>>44040859this is male slander, we can be holes too!!! ignore the fact i literally don't have one in front
>trans women colored blue same as cis men just because assigned sex is apparently SO important for this dataanother day to wish TCD
>>44040871yeah so true it's not important at all like there's no pattern hereyou are not a retarded troon who would be dragged up by the agps either like that's just not true
>>44040871if trannies have female brains why does their performance on multiple mental exercises align more with other amabs
>sat scores>of NYU APPLICANTSmy hypothesis:trannies have less entitlement (or, well, at least less entitlement for academic / life progress matters) so all the stupid trannies aren't going to apply, only the ones who have real good scores. cissies and nb people and esp cis women assume they'll get because, they just will, okay? b-because they're supposed to! thats just how life is supposed to go! but if your whole life is on a tightrope bc you've spec'd so hard into your entitlement into one thing (gender) that you might get kicked out about it, then yeah, you're probably not going to apply if you're retarded. if you think about how often trans men will do literally nothing to transition that would risk their social status it makes more sense.or, if i were to pitch it to a chud, male socialization makes you more avoidant.i would wager that if you did this with a uni in a poorer country, you'd get slightly more uniform results.
>>44040708>idiot agps score better than enlightened aapscrazy
>>44040708Why Women are Falling Behind in the US SATS?Test Format and Confidence: US standardized tests, such as the SAT, include a higher proportion of multiple-choice questions. Research suggests that boys tend to have higher test-taking confidence (or are more willing to guess without penalty), whereas girls often experience test anxiety or are penalised for over-thinkingSpatial Reasoning Focus: The mathematics portion of the SAT heavily tests spatial and abstract reasoning, where boys often score slightly higher, while girls tend to perform better with structured, sequential algorithms.Stereotype Threat: Studies indicate that societal stereotypes regarding women in STEM can trigger anxiety during high-stakes testing, further impacting female scores on standardised math sections. While US women underperform on the SAT math section and hold lower STEM representation, they actually outperform men in overall high school Grade Point Averages (GPAs), high school graduation rates, and overall college enrollment.
>>44041073what prompt did you give your AI boyfriend for this?
>while US women underperform on [objective, blind metric], they actually outperform men in [metrics clouded by female preferential treatment by teachers]thank you chatgpt, very cool
>>44041073>men perform better on objective test bc women get “scared”>women perform better on grades that are determined by teachers who are 90% female
>>44040708Your sample sizes are a literal joke. Celebrating a "win" or arguing about "brainmogs" based on a sample size of 16 people is embarrassing. Anyone with a basic understanding of statistics knows that n=16 means the data is completely useless. If two of those 16 trans women had a bad test day or caught a cold, the entire bar would plunge to the bottom of the chart. You are building an entire psychological worldview on the test scores of a group of people that could fit inside a single passenger van.The graph is designed to trick stupid people (like you), and it worked flawlessly. The Y-axis starts at 1280. The actual gap between the cis men and cis women is a measly 54 points on a 1600-point scale, a minor variance of about 3.3%. By stretching the axis, the chart's creator made a tiny puddle look like the Pacific Ocean. The most delusional part of the thread is the pseudo-scientific rambling about "male socialisation" and "AGP genius levels." This isn't a cross-section of humanity; it’s a self-selected group of hyper-competitive kids applying to an expensive, elite tier-1 university in New York. The data doesn't measure innate gender intelligence; it measures who dares to pay NYU's $90 application fee. Marginalised kids who aren't scoring in the 99th percentile don't waste their time applying to NYU; wealthy cis kids with average scores apply as a safety or legacy choice all the time. The chart shows selection bias, not genetic superiority.
>>44040793Wrong, gaydens are the highest IQSAT scores goodgoyness not intelligence
>>44041125 >>44041140 The "female teacher favouritism" theory completely falls apart the second you look at actual, blind, standardised metrics. Take AP exams. They are national, standardised tests graded completely blindly by external examiners who don't know the student's gender. If girls only did well because of teacher bias, they would absolutely tank on AP tests. But they don't, College Board data shows girls consistently outscore boys on the majority of AP exams, including history, English, and multiple sciences. You’re treating a three-hour multiple-choice test like a pure IQ metric when it’s mostly just a measure of family wealth. The SAT is highly coachable, and scores scale linearly with how much money parents spend on test prep to game the format. Even major longitudinal studies from places like UC Berkeley show that high school GPA is a way better predictor of college graduation and actual career success than the SAT ever was. You're hyper-focusing on a single, coachable math section to declare some grand victory while completely ignoring the fact that women are outperforming men across basically every blind, standardised, and long-term academic metric out there. It is actually a known problem with literacy gaps between boys and girls. In many Western countries, the reading gap is equivalent to boys missing an entire YEAR of schooling compared to their female peers.
>>44041143Someone stuff this hole bruh
>>44041174uc Berkeley professors have literally just signed a petition to reinstate the sat bc the new crop of students are too dumb and they’ve had to expand remedial classes
>>44041189Gen Z is actually dumber than the generation before, so it makes total sense to me. Plus, the American school system is very flawed and hasn't been updated since the 80s. The fundamental structure is completely obsolete.
>>44041245that’s just bc Gen Z is browner than ever. funny how other countries never “update their education structure” and don’t have the same problems
