Forum

Free news

FREE blog

Donate

Search

Subscribe

jews/911

Feedback

dna

Gun poll

RCC

AIDS

Home

Fathers

Surveys

Holocaust

IQ

14th Amdt

19th Amdt

Israelites

NWO

Homicide

Blacks

Whites

Signatory

Talmud

Watchman

Gaelic

Traitors

Health?

 

 Gender Gap

Two Standard Deviations

In physical, emotional, and mental attributes

The male brain has 3 1/2billion more brain cells than the female brain, two standard deviations

There are 5,940,000 female and 4,861,000 male students in our undergraduate schools, and if the math skills of these girls follows the pattern of the Howard Wainer study, then 2,678,940 girls have math skills equivalent to boys who flunk out of math, 1,799,820 have math skills equivalent to boys who get D's, and 1,455,300 have math skills equivalent to boys who get C's.

None of them have math skills which would qualify them to follow a career in STEMS, while more than half of the 5,940,000 boys who were rejected (or 2,970,000 of them) to make room for these girl students, WOULD have benefited from a career in STEMS.

Why would we as a society do this at a time when high tech careers are so valuable, and so profitable? It's like cutting our nose off to spite our face. f you ever wondered why we can't make our own shoes, much less our own semiconductors and electronics, and instead must go all the way to China to have them made for us, then now you know why.

Math tests simply present mathematical facts to students to measure how well they can solve problems, and cannot be designed to "discriminate against" women, Blacks, Hispanics, nor Asians (particularly Asian men who score higher than the so-called privileged White men). The fact that 51% of college boys can solve
problems ( and thus get A's and B's in college math) which no girls can solve, not even those who get A's in college math, means just that--no American girl can solve problems that at least half of American boys have proven on SAT math tests that they CAN solve. All math problems are representative of how well a citizen can solve problems at school, at work, in science, in politics, and in life.

What's the effect of this invidious discrimination against our boys?  If all of the 5,940,000 boys who had been denied admission to make room for this many girls, had instead been accepted, we would now have 10,801,000 boys in college, and at least half of them, or 5,400,500 boys who CAN solve math problems, would be in our undergraduate schools where they CAN benefit from an undergraduate education. This is 122% more than the current figure of 2,430,500 students who DO understand math.

 

THIS IS A FEMINIST PH.D'S BRAIN ON DRUGS

Also see the Scientific Evidence that Men and Women are Designed Differently

bellcurve.gif (8607 bytes)

 

THIS IS THE NAEP ON THE SAME DRUGS

 

 

 

 

 

THIS IS THE REAL DRUG FREE REALITY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

wpe4.gif (21327 bytes)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note that this salary database reports the 2.2 times greater earnings of male doctors over female doctors in Dallas, Texas, which is consistent with the BLS Survey which reports that male physicians earn 60% more than female physicians ($140,000 vs $88,000), that male dentists earn 60% more than female dentists (110k vs. 68k).

This BLS report "Highlights of Women�sEarnings in 2010" shows that the weekly earnings of a woman who takes out hundreds of thousands of dollars of student loans to become a physician are only $13 dollars higher than a woman who could become a pharmacist with NO  student loan debt ($1,618 vs. $1,605). It also shows that male nurses earn 14% more than female nurses, that male police officers earn 29% more, male bartenders earn 32% more, male janitors earn 47% more, White women earn 35% more than Hispanic women (oh, the irony), men who live in West Virginia earn 45% more but those in California earn only 12% more, that in 1994 men with BS degrees earned only 30% more than women with BS degrees but by 2009 they earned 37% more, that men inspectors and men truck drivers earn 44% more.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpswom2010.pdf

 

 

NAEP: LYING With Statistics

 

 

 

 

 

TIMSS

 

Table 3

The less than 140 girls in the NSF Physics program who participated in 12th grade TIMSS performed very poorly in TIMSS physics: 41 points lower than the *average*12th grade girl in Cyprus, 34 points lower than the *average* girl in Greece, 13 points lower than Latvian girls, 68 points lower than Norwegian girls, 52 points lower than Russian girls, 62 points lower than Swedish girls, 19 points lower than Australian girls, 28 points lower than Danish girls, and 32 points lower than Slovenian girls.  And of course compared to boys from all countries (*except* the US whose boys scored 9 points lower than NSF girls) they scored significantly lower than all others:  40 points lower than boys in the NSF physics program, 44 points lower than Canadian boys, 96 points lower than Cypriot boys, 59 points lower than Czech boys,  15 points lower than French boys,60 points lower than German boys, 70 points lower than Greek boys, 54 points lower than Latvian boys, 132 points lower than Norwegian boys, 109 points lower than Russian boys, 131 points lower than Swedish boys, 64 points lower than Swiss boys, 69 points lower than Australian boys, and 69 points lower than the international average.

Our NSF boys didn't do much better--they scored lower than the AVERAGE GIRLS in Sweden, Norway, and Russia, by 46, 50, and 15 points, resepctively.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GENDER GAP IN PHYSICS: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS

TIMSS shows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs. 444).  And Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American girls and Norwegian boys. 

SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score almost two standard deviations lower than boys in Protestant states.  And girls in Catholic states score another two standard deviations lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.  They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT math are boys and only one third are girls.  

Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena closely enough. Not only does it show that the standard deviation for males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of those respective races and topics, but it too shows that the gender gap for Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of a standard deviation, hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media expounds. Even the smaller standard deviations of .6 for "other" races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as "statistically insignificant".

NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites, and that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a standard deviation.   

While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that the gender gap in NAEP math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race gap decreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you otherwise. Is it really possible that our education system managed to alter God's Design by narrowing race and gender gaps which have existed for millennia--in only a few short decades? No. Is it possible that, given such huge gender and race gaps in other standardized tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which illustrates no gender and lower race gaps? No. What did happen is the way the standard deviation was changed in the reporting of the data. The most optimistic assessment of how this standard deviation was changed shows that this supposed decrease in the race gap from 38 to 28 points was actually an increase in the standard deviation from 5.4 to 9.3. Is that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as reflected in the 135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades and our scoring dead last in 17 of 34 TIMSS subjects have resulted in the dumbing down of Blacks even more?

That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated this test data (and they are truly experts at manipulating this data) have managed to remove it from our public consciousness and from all political debate.

Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative.  It's not possible that the total number of standard deviations of separation between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of 14 to 18.5 standard deviations.  This comparison of different types of tests designed to measure different attributes with different and in some cases unknown standard deviations is for illustrative purposes.  The facts are known by the experts and we the sheeple need to know what they know.

 


GENDER GAP IN THROWING: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS

Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?

Publication: Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
Publication Date: 01-DEC-05
Format: Online
Delivery: Immediate Online Access
Full Article Title: Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?(Research Note--Growth and Motor Development)

Article Excerpt
Key words: ball velocity, culture, developmental levels, motor development

Boys and girls in the U.S. consistently demonstrate large developmental differences in the overarm throw for force. Thomas and French (1985) applied a meta-analysis to 16 throwing studies and found that these as as...

...gender differences started early 3 years of age. The differences grew to 2-3 standard deviations by the teen years. Regardless of whether the dependent variable was the distance thrown, ball velocity, or the developmental level of the movements used, boys were developmentally more advanced than girls. Recently, Pulito Runion, Roberton, and Langendorfer (2003) replicated these findings in 13-year-olds. The gender difference in ball velocity was 1.8 standard deviations.

Reasons for this "gender gap" are unclear. Williams, Haywood, and Painter (1996) found no gender differences in ball velocities when they asked 7-12-year-olds to throw with their nondominant arm. They conjectured that boys practiced throwing more than girls, which made them superior on their dominant side. Nelson, Thomas, and Nelson (1991) found little longitudinal change over 3 years in girls' throwing patterns. They also speculated that this lack of change reflected less practice. On the other hand, Thomas and French (1985) and Nelson, Thomas, Nelson, and Abraham (1986) concluded that biology must be at least partially responsible for the gender gap. The latter reported that three anthropometric measures (joint diameters, shoulder/hip ratio, sum of skinfolds) and only one environmental measure (playing with other children) accounted for 41% of the variance in the distance 5-year-olds could throw.

These studies occurred in the U.S., a country that encourages male skillfulness in throwing through its cultural emphasis on sports like baseball, football, and softball. Newell's (1986) constraints theory (that levels of motor development emerge from the intersection of environment, person, and task) suggested that changing the cultural environment might affect the throwing movements children display. Different cultures form different constraints on gender. Indeed, the term "gender" represents biological sex overlaid with cultural expectations about appropriate behavior for that sex. Adopting the Newell model in the present study, we asked whether the gender gap would occur in a culture in which throwing was not particularly encouraged. In such a culture, we speculated that boys would practice the throw less than boys in the U.S. and, therefore, not be as developmentally ahead of girls.

To examine our cultural hypothesis, we replicated the Pulito Runion et al. (2003) throwing study in Germany, where the most popular sport is Fussball (soccer; Flippo, 1996). Over 1.5 million 7-14-year-olds participate in this sport (Hedderich, 2005). The only throwing sport some German children play is team handball, but, in contrast to Fussball, only 200,000 7-14-year-olds participate (Hedderich, 2005). For these reasons, we hypothesized that German teens would report less throwing practice than U.S. teens, but, like U.S. teens, they would consider ball throwing appropriate for both genders. Second, we hypothesized that the gender gap in ball velocities would be smaller in Germany than in the U.S., causing a significant gender by country interaction. We also hypothesized that the German teens would show gender differences in fewer movement components of the throw than U.S. teens.

Method

Participants

Pulito Runion et al. (2003) collected throwing data in May 1999 on 50 U.S. teenagers (Mage = 13.3 years). The participants had been randomly selected from junior high school physical education classes in Bowling Green, OH. In 2002, we randomly selected 52 German teens from physical education classes in a junior high school in Heldenbergen, a suburb of Frankfurt am Main, Germany. On average, the 28 German boys (M age = 13.8 years) were 6 months older than the U.S. boys (M age = 13.3 years) while the 24 girls (M age = 14.0 years) were 8 months older than the U.S. girls (M age = 13.3 years). The size of the German sample provided sufficient power (1-[beta] =...

 

horizontal rule

GENDER GAP IN CHESS: 100 TO 1

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT�Only 1% of the world's chess grandmasters are women. This underrepresentation is unlikely to be caused by discrimination, because chess ratings objectively reflect competitive results. Using data on the ratings of more than 250,000 tournament players over 13 years, we investigated several potential explanations for the male domination of elite chess. We found that (a) the ratings of men are higher on average than those of women, but no more variable; (b) matched boys and girls improve and drop out at equal rates, but boys begin chess competition in greater numbers and at higher performance levels than girls; and (c) in locales where at least 50% of the new young players are girls, their initial ratings are not lower than those of boys. We conclude that the greater number of men at the highest levels in chess can be explained by the greater number of boys who enter chess at the lowest levels.

GENDER GAP IN FAMILY INCOME: 5 to 1

A US Census Bureau population survey reports that men earn 85% of family incomes and women only 15%.

GENDER GAP IN ARRESTS: ONE STANDARD DEVIATION

We evaluate two alternative explanations for the converging gender gap in arrest�changes in women's behavior versus changes in mechanisms of social control. Using the offense of drunk driving and three methodologically diverse data sets, we explore trends in the DUI gender gap. We probe for change across various age groups and across measures tapping DUI prevalence and chronicity. Augmented Dickey-Fuller time-series techniques are used to assess changes in the gender gap and levels of drunk driving from 1980 to 2004. Analyses show women of all ages making arrest gains on men�a converging gender gap. In contrast, self-report and traffic data indicate little or no systematic change in the DUI gender gap. Findings support the conclusion that mechanisms of social control have shifted to target female offending patterns disproportionately. Little support exists for the contention that increased strain and liberalized gender roles have altered the gender gap or female drunk-driving patterns.

GENDER GAP IN PATENTS: 14 TO 1

Even after four decades of affirmative action and rampant feminism, how can it be explained that men STILL get 14 TIMES as many patents as women?

 "Of the scientists in our sample, 11.5% are listed as inventors on one or more patents. However, the full sample proportion masks a large gender difference: of the 903 women in the sample, 5.65% held patents as of the last year of the data. By contrast, 13% of the 3,324 male scientists in the data are listed on patents. Moreover, the 431 male patenters have amassed a total of 1,286 patents in our dataset. This compares to 92 patents produced by the 51 women patenters."

GENDER GAP IN ACADEMY MATHEMATICIANS: 20 TO 1

Excerpted from the following article is this statement about members of Academy mathematicians scoring 4.68 standard deviations higher than the national average for American males.  Could it be that more than half of Norway's population scores above this level?

"The pool of competitors is roughly the number of Americans between the ages of 25 and 85, approximately 190,000,000. Setting N  = 190,000,000 (the precise value is not important3) and the number of slots NS  = 143, the competitor to slot ratio, N /NS , is 1.329 million. With this value in (3), we find that the most probable number of women in the group of 143 Academy mathematicians is 7.1. (I choose not to round to the nearest integer.) At this time there are precisely 7 women in the mathematics sections of the Academy. (The agreement is almost embarrassing.) The 95% confidence interval4 is [2,12]. The minimum mathematical ability among the 143 Academy members is 4.68 SD greater than the male population mean. This is indeed an elite bunch!"

 

GENDER GAP IN BUSINESS INCOME: 2 STANDARD DEVIATIONS

 

bullet Adding women to the ownership of a man owned business reduces its potential receipts by $323,300 or 55.5%. 
bullet Adding men to the ownership of a woman owned business increases its potential receipts by $108,100 or 71.5%. 
bullet Completely removing women from ownership increases potential receipts by $431,400 to four fold greater than a woman owned business with no men owners present.

GENDER GAP IN COMPUTER SCIENCE: 5 TO 1

A Globe review shows that the proportion of women among bachelor's degree recipients in computer science peaked at 37 percent in 1985 and then went on the decline. Women have comprised about 28 percent of computer science bachelor's degree recipients in the last few years, and in the elite confines of research universities, only 17 percent of graduates are women. (The percentage of women among PhD recipients has grown, but still languishes at around 20 percent.)

GENDER GAP IN INCOMES--EGALITARIAN MEN EARN $10,000 LESS

"One of the most remarkable changes in the U.S. labor market during the 1980s has been the sharp reduction in the pay gap between men and women. In 1979, the ratio of the average hourly wage of women to that of men was 68.6 percent. By 1991, it had increased to 78.5 percent."

This ignores the other "most remarkable changes" in that timeframe, which was the two thirds plunge in household incomes in the US while other industrialized nations' (as well as former third world nations') household incomes skyrocketed, as well as factors like the following:

"The authors then turned to the connection between attitudes and salaries. Those subjects that had traditional attitudes towards workplace gender and were a standard deviation off the mean showed substantial salary disparities, with men earning over $11,000 more than their female peers. In contrast, those that were a standard deviation more egalitarian in their attitudes had a pay gap just over $1,000. Only about $1,500 of that came from higher earnings by egalitarian females; the rest is accounted for by a precipitous drop in the earnings of egalitarian males.

"Part of that difference arises from career choice; traditionalist men mostly outearned women in fields where there were fewer women employed. The difference was also largest in jobs on the lower-end of the income scale, suggesting that traditional gender roles are stronger influences in blue-collar fields. Seniority also had a big impact on disparities: over the 25-year study period, pay went up 120 percent for women, but nearly 320 percent for men." 

horizontal rule

 

After thirty years of relative constancy, the gender pay gap in the United States narrowed substantially in the 1980s. For example, published tabulations from the Census Bureau on the median annual earnings of year-round, full-time workers indicate that the female-to-male ratio rose from 59.7 to 68.7 percent between 1979 and 1989�a gain of 9.0 percentage points. However, the rate of convergence slowed markedly in the following decade, with a further increase to 72.2 percent by 1999�an increase of only 3.5 percentage points. In this paper, we shed light on several possible sources of slowing convergence in the 1990s using data from the Michigan Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID), the only nationally representative data base that contains information on workers� actual labor market experience. Labor market experience has been shown to be an extremely important factor in explaining the gender pay gap (Mincer and Polachek 1974) and its trends (e.g., Blau and Kahn 1997; O'Neill and Polachek 1993). We focus on a number of hypotheses that might help to explain the slower progress of women in the 1990s.

 

GENDER GAP IN DIVING: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS

 

wpe1.gif (4587 bytes)

 

 

horizontal rule

 

DIFFERENCE IN LENGTH OF MALE & FEMALE CHROMOSOME

3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS

As early as 1928, it was known in our literature that there is a three standard deviation difference between the lengths of the male and female chromosomes.

 

GENDER GAP IN POLITICS: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS

http://www.gallup.com/poll/pollInsights/#GG

 

Labor Unions

Currently, 58% of Americans say they approve of labor unions, while 33% disapprove. The high point for approval of unions came in 1953 and 1957, when 75% approved. The low point was in 1979 and 1981, when 55% approved. [Aug 5-8, 2002; Aug 14-17, 1981; May 4-7, 1979; Jan 17-22, 1957; Oct 9-14, 1953]

 

 

Most Valuable Subject in School

Among the general American population, 34% say math is the subject they studied in school that has been most valuable to them, while 24% say English/literature/reading. Among men, math is chosen more frequently than English is, by 41% to 15%. Among women, English is chosen more often than math is, by 32% to 28%. [Aug 5-8, 2002]

 

 

Fear for Children at School

Among white Americans who have children in school, 27% say they fear for their oldest child's safety while he or she is at school. The percentage is substantially higher (42%) among nonwhite American parents. [Aug 5-8, 2002]

 

 

Public or Private School

The vast majority of parents with children in kindergarten through 12th grade (89%) say they send their children to public schools. Seven percent say they send their children to private schools, while 2% say their children attend parochial schools. Another 2% say their children are home schooled. [Aug 5-8, 2002]

 

 

Political Parties and Corporate Interests

Are Americans more likely to say that the Republicans or the Democrats watch out for the best interests of ordinary Americans, rather than the interests of corporations? Find out by reading Gallup's analysis of the political impact made by the corporate scandals.

 

 

wpeB.gif (8393 bytes)

wpeC.gif (7452 bytes)

wpeA.gif (7961 bytes)

wpe9.gif (8180 bytes)

wpe2.gif (8406 bytes)

wpe1.gif (7551 bytes)

Look at all the following countries whose 12th graders didn't participate in TIMSS, but whose 8th graders scored up to 100 points higher than ours!

wpe4.gif (13908 bytes)

 

 

Confessions of a woman teacher

http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,49290.90.html

I'll admit, I haven't read all 6 pages of the thread.  Maths terrify me.  I fell off the truck back in 5th grade.  I'm a member of the early "new" math generation, and I went to a private lower school where some teachers liked math and taught it the "old" way, some decided to teach it the "new" way, and some didn't like teaching it so it wasn't emphasised.

I did okay in algebra, as long as we were talking theory.  Calculators were banned, and to this day I still sometimes mentally count on my fingers, so arithmetically I'd sometimes fail getting an answer (which was a fail--loic didn't count for points). 

I really liked, and did well at, geometry for some reason now lost to me in the midst of time and maths fear.  While I was otherwise a good good chemestry student that loved the sciences, I lost it when I had a HS instructor that insisted on starting every class with a graded quiz of 10 questions that stretched across the full front of the room blackboard which had to be answered in 5 minutes using a slide rule.  In that entire year I think I might have managed to get one of those damned questions finished before the time was up.  Other than that my understanding of the science was sound, and I absolutely loved biology, but those damned quizzes cost me my grade--and any confidence I had.  I barely passed that class. 

I've avoided taking any maths and sciences since, although at the zoo I teach basic science, including chemestry, biology, geology, and ecology--and do it very well from what I'm told by teachers bringing in their classes, and by other volunteers that have taught the subjects, some professionally, for far longer than I.

My late husband, who was a math whiz, insisted that, based upon what he'd seen of my interests and abilities, I'd enjoy and do quite well in physics--but the entire idea scares the pants off of me.  In order to eventually graduate from any program I have to have my math requirement satisfied.  I've avoided taking it formally for 36 years (oddly, the older I get, and the more I avoid it formally, the more it makes sense to me in an informal setting).  But, I also haven't graduated in 36 years; I sure as heck have enjoyed all the other courses--mostly, from year 1, upper level-- I've taken in that time, though. 

I sometimes think I'm the personification of Zonker from Doonsbury, except for our different motivations for not graduating.  I'm a fairly strong person, but I actually panic and break down crying at the idea of having to take a math class for a grade.

 

 

Redefining the Gender Gap

From http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/10/13/gender

Both male and female undergraduates are more likely to have higher college grades as the percentage of female faculty members increases. The more time female students devote to exercise and sports, the higher their grades are likely to be. For male students, more time on exercise and sports has the opposite effect. Women are more likely to report growth in critical thinking during college if they attend private colleges than public universities.

These are among the statistics in a new book that aims to change the way educators think about the gender gap in college enrollments. With women making up solid majorities of undergraduate enrollments nationally, and more than 60 percent at many institutions, gender gaps are a hot topic � but the focus has been on why female numbers are up and male numbers aren�t. Linda J. Sax says that�s only part of the equation.

Sax, an associate professor of education at the University of California at Los Angeles, says it is time to focus on the ways men and women experience higher education and why some experiences help either men or women but not both. The emphasis on the total enrollment figures hides real issues facing men and women in college, she argues in The Gender Gap in College: Maximizing the Developmental Potential of Women and Men, just published by Jossey-Bass.

The book�s purpose, she writes, is to �add context to what have become oversimplified but popular messages � that gender equity has been achieved, that women are an academic success story, and that men are experiencing an educational crisis. There is some truth to each of these messages, but they tend to convey the status of women and mean as a zero-sum game.� The more nuanced reality, she writes, is that there are problems facing both men and women � and educators need to acknowledge and respond to these differences.

While arguing for this type of analysis, Sax also acknowledges in her book that there are dangers associated with it. �There is a legitimate argument that the study of gender difference primarily reinforces gender differences,� she writes. Noting that in many cases, differences among men and among women are greater than the differences between them, she warns against using such analysis to �overstate� differences or to stereotype students. But she goes on to say that there are enough notable differences that the benefits of this research outweigh the risks.

And that led her to examine the data from millions of students nationwide collected by UCLA�s Cooperative Institutional Research Program � which is best known for producing the �freshman survey� each year, but which also surveys students at other points in their college careers.

One reason that it is important to examine these gender differences, writes Sax, is that the female college experience isn�t consistent with the data showing female students doing better than their male counterparts academically. It�s not that they don�t perform better, but the women enter college with a significant confidence gap. On a series of factors, male freshmen � who on average aren�t as well prepared as females � have much more confidence. Only on writing does the female self-confidence level outpace the male level (and reflect reality).

Self-Confidence of First-Year College Students by Gender, 2006

Academic Skill

% of Women Who Think

They Are Above Average

% of Men Who Think

They Are Above Average

Intellectual self-confidence

52.2%

68.8%

Mathematical ability

35.9%

53.1%

Academic ability

65.9%

71.9%

Writing ability

49.3%

45.7%

Of particular concern, Sax writes, is that women appear unwilling to believe or admit that �they are as competent as their performance would suggest,� and that this lack of confidence generally appears to grow during college. [editor's note: whether consciously or unconsciously, teachers give grades to female students which are two letter grades higher than boys of the same academic level].

In looking at data on grades, Sax finds that there are some factors that help both male and female students achieve academically. As many have noted, levels of �academic engagement� promote academic success for all students. And both male and female students are least likely to do well at large public universities.

One finding in particular is striking, given the debates about affirmative action and the importance of diversifying the faculty, which was once overwhelmingly male. The data suggest a direct relationship, Sax writes, between institutions having larger proportions of female students and faculty members and all students � males too � performing better academically. While noting that the data do not suggest why this is the case, Sax urges researchers to explore the reasons for this relationship.

But at the same time, Sax also finds that male students tend to perform better academically when they have campus peer groups that support �traditional gender roles.� And at campuses with a strong emphasis on the arts, male academic performance tends to suffer.

One of the areas of particular concern to Sax is self-confidence in mathematical ability, given that this skill set is necessary for success in so many science and technology fields. Some of the relationships she finds are not surprising � for example that men and women both have higher confidence in math if they major in engineering or science fields. But the impact of major is stronger for women than men, which Sax says could mean �that continued exposure to mathematics is particularly important for female students.�

One key area for women�s mathematics self-confidence level, Sax finds, is the role of faculty. Female students� confidence levels go up more with positive interactions with professors, but there is also a correlation between female students who feel their questions are dismissed and declines in self-confidence.

At a time when many colleges promote the idea that they are teaching critical thinking skills, Sax also finds differences in the way male and female students report gains. Women are more likely to report gains if they attend private residential colleges and major in the humanities. Women who major in education tend to report little change in their critical thinking abilities, but men at campuses with many education majors � even if the men themselves aren�t in the major � report major gains. Both men and women gain if they seek out ethnic studies or other courses that expose them to different kinds of people than themselves, Sax reports.

In all, Sax�s book identifies 584 �college effects� that are not identical for men and women. She closes by urging other researchers to explore why these differences exist and what steps might be taken to improve the academic experience for men and women. And she notes that even where the data suggest similarities for male and female students (with both benefiting from interaction with professors, for example), the nature of those interactions may have differing impact. �Institutional efforts aimed at improving the college experience for both genders must consider the unique needs of each,� she writes.

 

bulletOriginal references to the NCES data base
bulletAdditional Graphs of SAT, NAEP, IAEP, ACT, and other sex differences

 

The physical, emotional, and mental differences between males and females.

Male brain has 3 1/2 billion more brain cells than the female brain

In the following 12 subjects, no country scored lower than American 12th Grade Girls who scored:

  1. 22 points lower than American boys and 90 points lower than Greek girls in Numbers & Equations.

  2. 41 points lower than American boys and 123 points lower than Cypriot girls in Calculus.

  3. 31 points lower than American boys and 121 points lower than French girls in Geometry.

  4. 34 points lower than American boys and 139 points lower than Norwegian girls in Physics.

  5. 53 points lower than American boys and 130 points lower than Norwegian girls in Mechanics.

  6. 21 points lower than American boys and 152 points lower than Swedish girls in Electricity & Magnetism.

  7. 6 points lower than American boys and 37 points lower than Norwegian girls in Heat.

  8. 18 points lower than American boys and 86 points lower than Swedish girls in Wave Phenomena.

  9. 20 points lower than American boys and 92 points lower than Swedish girls in Modern Physics.

  10. 31 points lower than American boys and 117 points lower than French girls in Advanced Math.

  11. 23 points lower than American boys and 65 points lower than Swedish girls in General Science.

  12. 11 points lower than American boys and 77 points lower than Dutch girls in General Math.

 

horizontal rule

Zero percent of American 12th grade girls understand math.

Zero percent of American 12th grade girls understand physics.

horizontal rule

bullet

Boys score 46 points higher than girls in SAT math.

bullet

Boys score 72 points higher than girls in GRE quantitative.

bullet

Foreign boys score 171 points higher than American girls in GRE quantitative.

bullet

Boys score 2 points higher than girls in ACT math.

bullet

Boys score 5 points higher than girls in NAEP math.

bullet

Boys score 53 points higher than girls in TIMSS physics.

bullet

Boys score 41 points higher than girls in TIMSS calculus.

bullet

Swiss boys score 47 points higher than Swiss girls in TIMSS calculus.

bullet

Boys score 17 points higher than girls in IAEP math.

bullet

Men college graduates earn 66% more than women college graduates.

bullet

Median weekly earnings of men exceed those for women by 35%.

bullet

Men outperform women in Olympic Platform Diving by 46%.

bullet

Men outperform women in Olympic 100 Meter Freestyle by 10%.

bullet

Men outperform women in Olympic Pole Vaulting by infinity.

bullet

Men outperform women in Olympic Shot Put by 31%.

bullet

Men outperform women in Olympic 1500 Meter Run by 9%.

bullet

Men outperform women in Olympic Springboard Diving by 20%.

bullet

Men outperform women as racing champions by infinity.

bullet

Men outperform women as boxing champions by infinity.

bullet

Men outperform women chess champions by infinity.

bullet

Men outperform women as baseball champions by infinity.

bullet

Men outperform women as money winners in golf by 118%.

bullet

Men outperform women as Nobel Peace Prize winners by infinity.

bullet

Men outperform women as Nobel Prize in Physics winners by 76X.

bullet

Men outperform women as Nobel Prize in Chemistry winners by 45X.

bullet

Men outperform women as Nobel Prize in Medicine winners by 25X.

bullet

Men outperform women as Nobel Prize in Literature winners by 13X (oops, 10X).

bullet

Men outperform women as Nobel Prize in Economic Science winners by infinity.

horizontal rule

 

Gender Gap in SAT Math Scores Widens

"there has been a difference of nearly a standard deviation between the mean mathematics scores of males and females" Trends in SAT Scores and Other Characteristics of Examinees Planning To Major in Mathematics, Science, or Engineering. Research Report. Source: Scholastic Aptitude Test-ABSTRACT, ERIC_NO-ED376079.

This study analyzed data from the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) taken between 1977 and 1988 to study trends in the numbers, test scores, and other characteristics of high school seniors planning to major in math, science, or engineering, and to compare t hese data with comparable data from examinees planning to major in other fields. Results indicated that: (1) the total test-taking population declined in number until 1983 and has since been increasing; (2) the percentage of examinees who planned to major in math, science, or engineering increased from 24% to 29% of the examinee population; (3) in 1988 examinees planning to major in math, science, or engineering obtained a mean verbal score 18 points higher and a mean mathematics score 31 points higher th an the population average; (4) among students planning to major in math, science, or engineering, the mean mathematics score declined until 1981, increased until 1985, and declined thereafter; (5) among examinees who identify themselves as white and who p lan to major in math, science, or engineering, there has been a differences of nearly a standard deviation between the mean mathematics scores of males and females; sex differences were not as great among black examinees; and (6) among examinees who ident ified themselves as black and who plan to major in math, science, or engineering, the mean mathematics score for males rose 18 points, and the mean for females rose 20 points. Appendices include Student Descriptive Questionnaires and definitions of major field categories in Science and Non-Science Tables. (MKR) 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Physical Characteristics

Percent or factor by which males exceed females.  

Men Women Factor
Height (cm) 176.8 163.7 +8%
Weight (lbs) 163 127 +28%
Life Expectancy 70.3 77.9 -10.8%
Abortions 0 1,600,000 0
Suicides 18.6 6 +200%
Vietnam Casualties 58,151 76 +763X
Accidental Deaths 74,403 30,909 +2.4X
1982 Arrests 6,464,604 1,289,373 +5X
Child Murders (excl SIDS) 500 611 -22.2%
% of World Chess Champs 100% 0% infinity
SAT Math Scores 502 457 +9.8%
Average # Brain Cells 22.8 Billion 19.3 Billion +18.1%
Death Rates/100K--Cancer 221 191 +15.7%
     Heart Disease 284 279 +1.8%
     Accidents & Violence 81 32 +2.5X
     Auto Deaths 23 11 +2X
     Homicides 9 2.8 +3.2X
     Firearm Injuries 26 4 +6.5X
     Drugs 7 3 +2.3X
     Alcohol 11 3 +3.7X
Deaths Per Year 1,163,000 1,116,000 +4.2%

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in SAT Math Scores

As affirmative action and other anti-productivity federal schemes have taken effect, both SAT and ACT scores have declined, and the gender gap in mathematics widened, from 17.6% in 1967 to 18.1% in 1989 on SAT Math, and from 12.2% to 13.7% on ACT M ath.  

SAT Math 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1989 Change
Men 529 520 509 495 491 499 500 -29 points
Women 485 476 465 449 443 452 454 -31 points
Percent Difference 15.44% 15.94% 16.60% 18.47% 19.75% 18.65% 18.11%

Percent by which males scored higher than females averaged 17.65% over the last 3 decades. Source: College Entrance Examination Board, New York  

horizontal rule

50.4% of Male Math Majors at Eastern Universities Score Higher Than All Women

                                                                     College Grade
                   Number of      Number of       Percent   Percent  Men   Women
SAT range          Men            Women           (Men)     (Women)

(592 & up)         5,693          0               22.0%         0%   A
(575-591)          7,357          0               28.4%         0%   B
(549-574)          6,931          5,144           26.8%      24.5%   C     A
(532-548)          2,881          6,383           11.1%      30.4%   D     B
(524-531)          3,030          0               11.7%         0%   F
(493-523)          0              5,394              0%      25.7%         C
(476-492)          0              2,235              0%      10.6%         D
(475 & Below)      0              1,872              0%       8.9%         F

1) 50.4% of the men scored higher than the highest scoring women.
2) 68% of the men scored higher than the highest women.
3) 64.5% of the women scored lower than men who got "D"s.
4) And that 45.2% of the women scored lower than all of the men.
5) Percent of women in the men's "A" range = 0%.
6) Percent of women in the men's "B" range = 0%.
7) Percent of women in the men's "C" range = 24.5%.
8) Percent of women in the men's "D" range = 30.4%.
9) Percent of women in the men's "F" range = 0%.

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in ACT Math Scores Widens

ACT Math 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1989 Change
Male 24.5 22.3 19.3 18.9 18.9 18.6 18.3 -25.3%
Women 22.7 20.6 16.2 16.2 16.0 16.0 16.1 -29.1%
Difference 7.9% 12.2% 19.14% 16.67% 18.12% 16.25% 13.66%

Percent by which males scored higher than females averaged 14.84% over the last 3 decades. Source: The American College Testing Program. Note: the narrowing in the gap from 19.14% in 1970 to 13.66% in 1989 is the result of declining male scores rather than increasing female scores, indicating that narrowing the gap even further requires decreasing male scores even further, rather than increasing female scores.
A similar psychological phenomena has affected economic performance in the US.
NOTE:  Changes in 1990 in both the SAT and ACT test make an accurate correlation with previous data impossible.  The Department of Education reports that the SAT "has increased" while ACT scores "remained flat", indicating that the increase in SAT scores is due entirely to the changes in the test and not to any improvement in education quality.

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Graduate Record Exams

Jennifer Siders at the University of Texas SidersJ@Physics.Utexas.edu wrote:
5th year graduate student
Physics Dept
University of Texas at Austin
(512)471-0788
I'm want to thank everyone that sent their Physics GRE scores and comments for the "informal" survey. The number of people that replied was fairly low so I can't say too much about the stats.
21 women
20 men
11 professors
19 grad students
6 post docs
5 misc
The average percentile score was
44% (+/-20%) for the women who responded
75% (+/-14%) for the men

Even with such low numbers I think this is a pretty significant difference in scores. They barely overlap within their standard deviation. I called the GRE Board and they confirmed that there is a gender gap on the test and that white males generally score higher than women and minorities.

My own thoughts on why the gender gap exists are the following. Educational research on standardized tests have shown that women will spend more time `proving' that they have the right answer while men are more likely to `go with their gut feeling' and skip on to the next problem. Its a problem of confidence and guessing. If you don't guess on these tests and only answer the questions that you've had time to work out, there's very little chance that you will do as well as someone who is willing to guess and works through the test quickly. You don't have time to double check your work and women are more likely to do this. I know for a fact that I did not guess the first 3 times I took the Physics GRE and barely made it all the way to the end. The fourth time I studied by doing hundreds of multiple choice, learning to do them quickly and raised my score almost 200 points from my lowest score. I think the gender gap might disappear or at least narrow if the time allowed for the test was longer, or if it was fill in the blank.

There is a graduate student, Phil Bunce, getting a Masters degree in Physics Education who is going to do his thesis on the validity of the Physics GRE and its value in Graduate School Admissions. The primary goal of this research will be to determine if the physics dept's use of this test at UT is valid. He's going to compare undergrad GPA, Grad GPA in core courses with Physics GRE score for males and females for the last 5-10 years. We may have difficulty getting a broad enough database because of the low number of women students. If you or your school would be interested in performing a similar study or would be interested in the results of such a study feel free to contact me. Thank you, Jennifer Siders January 29, 1996 -- I will be getting a detailed summary of Physics GRE results from ETS very soon and can send you a copy if you wish. What I have at the moment is the 1989-92 Volume and Score Data for the Physics GRE Test. I received this from someone who had attended an ETS meeting. It took me a while but I found someone at ETS who knew what I was talking about and is going to send me one directly. This way I can cite a source for the information. :-)
 

Gender & Country Percent(of test takers) Mean Physics GRE
Men 84 681
Women 16 605
Difference 425% 18.77%
China 16 836
USA 56 604
Difference 250% 57.43%

I have data from a survey I did over the internet and also from 3 years worth of applicants to our Physics Dept that show a similar gap. There will be a special session at the APS/AAPT meeting May 4 on this topic where I will be presenting these results.

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Annual Salaries

Annual Earnings, by Education Attainment  

Total Not High School Graduate High School Graduate Some College or Associate Degree Bachelor's Degree Advanced Degree
Men $28,448 $14,934 $22,978 $25,660 $40,039 $58,324
Women $17,145 $9,311 $14,128 $16,023 $23,991 $33,814
Difference 65.93% 60.39% 62.64% 60.14% 66.89% 72.48%

Percent by which males earn more than females at various education levels averages 64.75%. Source: US Dept. of Commerce. 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Median Weekly Earnings

Median Weekly Earnings of Full-Time Wage & Salary Workers.  

25 yrs & older 25 -34 35 -44 45 -54 55 -64 65Yrs & Older
Men $559 $478 $598 $656 $586 $453
Women $416 $396 $437 $441 $396 $335
Difference 34.38% 20.71% 36.84% 48.75% 47.98% 35.22

Percent by which males earn more than females at various age levels averages 37.31%. Source: US Dept. of Labor 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Olympic Platform Diving

Diving 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992
Men 148.58 164.18 504.12 600.51 835.65 710.91 638.61 677.31
Women 99.8 109.59 390 406.59 596.25 435.51 445.2 461.43
Difference 48.88% 49.81% 29.26% 47.69% 40.15% 63.24% 43.44% 46.78%

Percent by which males score higher than females in platform diving averaged 46.16% over the last 3 decades. Source: for all Olympic scores, International Olympics Committee. 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Olympic 100 Meter Freestyle

Freestyle 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992
Men 53.4 52.2 51.22 49.99 50.4 49.8 48.63 49.02
Women 59.5 60 58.59 55.65 54.79 55.92 54.93 54.64
Difference 10.25% 13.00% 12.58% 10.17% 8.01% 10.94% 11.47% 10.29%

Percent by which males swim faster than females averaged 10.84% over the last 3 decades. 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Olympic Pole Vaulting

Pole Vault -- Olympics Scores.  

Pole Vaulting 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992
Men 16' 8 3/4" 17' 8 1/2" 18' 1/2" 18' 1/2" 18' 11 1/2" 18' 10 1/4" 19' 9 1/4" 19' 1/4"
Women na na na na na na na na
Difference na na na na na na na

There are no pole vaulting competitions for females. 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Shot Put

Shot Put -- Olympics Scores NOTE: Males's Shot Put is 16 Pounds NOTE: Females's Shot Put is 8 Pounds -- half of the males's shot put  

Shot Put 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992
Men 66.71 67.4 69.5 69.1 70 69.8 73.7 71.2
Women 59.5 64.3 69 69.4 54.79 55.92 54.93 54.64
Difference 12.12% 4.82% 0.72% 0.43% 27.76% 24.82% 34.17% 30.31%

Even with TWICE the weight the percent by which males scored higher than females over the last 3 decades averaged 16.89%. 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Olympic 1500 Meter Run

1500 Meter Run -- Olympics Scores  

1500 Meter Run 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992
Men 130.3 123.4 123.0 119.4 115.4 118.4 112.1 114.8
Women 142.6 142.4 140.9 136.6 131.0 123.4 120.7 125.9
Difference 8.63% 13.34% 12.70% 12.59% 11.91% 4.05% 7.13% 8.82%

Percent by which males run faster than females averaged 9.90% over the last 3 decades. 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Olympic Springboard Diving

Springboard Diving -- Olympics Scores  

Springboard Diving 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992
Men 159.9 170.2 594.1 619.5 905.0 754.4 730.8 676.5
Women 145.0 150.8 450.0 506.2 725.9 530.7 580.2 572.4
Difference 10.28% 12.86% 32.02% 22.38% 24.67% 42.15% 25.96% 18.19%

Percent by which males outscore females in diving averaged 23.56% over the last 3 decades 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Racing

Racing Champions  

NASCAR Motorcycle Formula One LeMans One-Mile Speed Record Indy Car
Men 28 20 14 24 36
Women 0
Difference 28 20 14 24 36

Number of males champions versus number of female champions 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Boxing

Boxing Champions Since 1882  

Heavyweights Light-Heavy Weights Middle Weights Welter Weights Light Weights
Men 49 51 55 47 48
Women 0
Difference 49 51 55 47 48

Number of male champions versus number of female champions 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Chess

Chess Champions  

World Chess Champions Since 1866 US Chess Champions Since 1857
Men 16 46
Women
Difference 16 46

Number of male champions versus number of female champions 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Baseball

Baseball Champions  

Home Run Leaders Runs In Leader Batting Chamion Cy Young Awards Most Valuable Player Rookie Of The Year
Men 210 205 221 77 227 36
Women 0
Difference 210 205 221 77 227 36

Number of male champions versus number of female champions 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Golf

Leading Money Winners in PGA and LPGA  

Home Run Leaders 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994
Men $1,395,278 1,165,477 979,430 1,344,188 1,478,557 1,499,927
Women 654,132 863,578 763,118 693,335 595,992 687,201
Difference 113% 35% 28% 94% 153% 118%

Percent by which the male leading money winners' earnings exceeded the female leading money winners' earnings. 

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Nobel Awards

The Nobel Peace Prize Awards  

Awards Physics Chemistry Medicine Literature Peace Prize Economic Science
Men 152 137 103 90 102 36
Women 2 3 4 9 7 0
Difference 76X 45X 25X 10X 14X infinity

horizontal rule

Gender Gap in Airmen 1994

  Commercial Pilots Airline Transport Pilots Airplane Mechanics Flight Engineer
Men 132,763 114,498 405,727 58,040
Women 5,965 2,936 5,344 1,427
Difference 22x 39x 76x 41x

horizontal rule

The men’s discus weighs between 2.005 and 2.025 kilograms and has a diameter between 21.8 and 21.1 centimetres.

For women, the discus weighs 1.005 to 1.025 kilograms and measures 18-18.2 centimetres in diameter.

 

Corrected by kavking@my-deja.com who is the first feminazi to win a Dewey Button for Accuracy on October 3, 2000.

 

Men's records[edit]

Event Score Name Nation Games Date Ref
50 m rifle three positions Qual. 1180 [1] Niccol� Campriani  Italy (ITA) United Kingdom 2012 London 6 August 2012
1184 [2] Sergey Kamenskiy  Russia (RUS) Brazil 2016 Rio 14 August 2016 [3]
Final 1287.5 (Total) [4] Niccol� Campriani  Italy (ITA) United Kingdom 2012 London 6 August 2012
458.8 (Final) [5]  Italy (ITA) Brazil 2016 Rio 14 August 2016 [6]
1642.5 (Total) [7] Sergey Kamenskiy  Russia (RUS) Brazil 2016 Rio 14 August 2016 [8]
50 m rifle prone Qual. 600 [9] Christian Klees  Germany (GER) United States 1996 Atlanta 25 July 1996
629.0 [10] Sergey Kamenskiy  Russia (RUS) Brazil 2016 Rio 12 August 2016 [11]
Final 705.5 [12] Sergei Martynov  Belarus (BLR) United Kingdom 2012 London 3 August 2012
209.5 [13] Henri Jungh�nel  Germany (GER) Brazil 2016 Rio 12 August 2016 [14]
10 m air rifle Qual. 599 [15] Zhu Qinan  China (CHN) Greece 2004 Athens 16 August 2004
630.2 [16] Niccol� Campriani  Italy (ITA) Brazil 2016 Rio 6 August 2016 [17]
Final 702.7 (Total) [18] Zhu Qinan  China (CHN) Greece 2004 Athens 16 August 2004
206.1 (Final) [19] Niccol� Campriani  Italy (ITA) Brazil 2016 Rio 6 August 2016 [20]
836.3 (Total) [21]
50 m pistol Qual. 581 Aleksandr Melentiev  Soviet Union (URS) Soviet Union 1980 Moscow 20 July 1980
Final 666.4 (Total) [22] Boris Kokorev  Russia (RUS) United States 1996 Atlanta 23 July 1996
193.7 (Final) [23] Jin Jong-oh  South Korea (KOR) Brazil 2016 Rio 10 August 2016 [24]
760.7 (Total) [25]
25 m rapid fire pistol Qual. 592 Alexei Klimov  Russia (RUS) United Kingdom 2012 London 3 August 2012
592 Christian Reitz  Germany (GER) Brazil 2016 Rio 13 August 2016 [26]
Final 34 Leuris Pupo  Cuba (CUB) United Kingdom 2012 London 3 August 2012
34 Christian Reitz  Germany (GER) Brazil 2016 Rio 13 August 2016 [27]
10 m air pistol Qual. 591 Mikhail Nestruyev  Russia (RUS) Greece 2004 Athens 14 August 2004
Final 690.0 (Total)[28] Wang Yifu  China (CHN) Greece 2004 Athens 14 August 2004
202.5 (Final)[29] Ho�ng Xu�n Vinh  Vietnam (VIE) Brazil 2016 Rio 6 August 2016 [30]
783.5 (Total)[31]
Trap Qual. 125 Michael Diamond  Australia (AUS) United Kingdom 2012 London 6 August 2012
Final 146 David Kosteleck�
Giovanni Cernogoraz
Massimo Fabbrizi
 Czech Republic (CZE)
 Croatia (CRO)
 Italy (ITA)
China 2008 Beijing
United Kingdom 2012 London
United Kingdom 2012 London
10 August 2008
6 August 2012
6 August 2012
Double trap Qual. 145 [32] Walton Eller  United States (USA) China 2008 Beijing 12 August 2008
140 [33] Andreas L�w  Germany (GER) Brazil 2016 Rio 10 August 2016 [34]
140 [35] James Willett  Australia (AUS)
Final 190 Walton Eller  United States (USA) China 2008 Beijing 12 August 2008
Skeet Qual. 121 [36] Vincent Hancock  United States (USA) China 2008 Beijing 16 August 2008
123 [37] Abdullah Al-Rashidi  Independent Olympic Athletes (IOA) Brazil 2016 Rio 12 August 2016 [38]
Marcus Svensson  Sweden (SWE)
Final 145 Vincent Hancock
Tore Brovold
 United States (USA)
 Norway (NOR)
China 2008 Beijing 16 August 2008

Women's records[edit]

Event Score Name Nation Games Date Ref
50 m rifle three positions Qual. 592 [39] Jamie Lynn Gray  United States (USA) United Kingdom 2012 London 4 August 2012
589 [40] Petra Zublasing  Italy (ITA) Brazil 2016 Rio 11 August 2016 [41]
Final 691.9 [42] Jamie Lynn Gray  United States (USA) United Kingdom 2012 London 4 August 2012
458.6 [43] Barbara Engleder  Germany (GER) Brazil 2016 Rio 11 August 2016 [44]
10 m air rifle Qual. 400 [45] Kateřina Emmons  Czech Republic (CZE) China 2008 Beijing 9 September 2008
420.7 [46] Du Li  China (CHN) Brazil 2016 Rio 6 August 2016 [47]
Final 103.5 (Final)[48] Kateřina Emmons  Czech Republic (CZE) China 2008 Beijing 9 August 2008
503.5 (Total)[49]
208.0 (Final)[50] Virginia Thrasher  United States (USA) Brazil 2016 Rio 6 August 2016 [51]
624.3 (Total)[52]
25 m pistol Qual. 592 Zhang Jingjing  China (CHN) Brazil 2016 Rio 9 August 2016 [53]
Final 793.4 [54] Chen Ying  China (CHN) China 2008 Beijing 13 August 2008
10 m air pistol Qual. 391 Natalia Paderina  Russia (RUS) China 2008 Beijing 10 August 2008
Final 492.3 (Total)[55] Guo Wenjun  China (CHN) China 2008 Beijing 10 August 2008
199.4 (Final)[56] Zhang Mengxue  China (CHN) Brazil 2016 Rio 7 August 2016 [57]
587.1 (Total)[58] Vitalina Batsarashkina  Russia (RUS) Brazil 2016 Rio 7 August 2016
Trap Qual. 75 Jessica Rossi  Italy (ITA) United Kingdom 2012 London 4 August 2012
Final 99 Jessica Rossi  Italy (ITA) United Kingdom 2012 London 4 August 2012
Skeet Qual. 74 [59] Kim Rhode  United States (USA) United Kingdom 2012 London 29 July 2012
73 [60] Wei Meng  China (CHN) Brazil 2016 Rio 12 August 2016 [61]
Final 99 [62] Kim Rhode  United States (USA) United Kingdom 2012 London 29 July 2012

 

 

 


 

TRAITOR McCain

jewn McCain

ASSASSIN of JFK, Patton, many other Whites

killed 264 MILLION Christians in WWII

killed 64 million Christians in Russia

holocaust denier extraordinaire--denying the Armenian holocaust

millions dead in the Middle East

tens of millions of dead Christians

LOST $1.2 TRILLION in Pentagon
spearheaded torture & sodomy of all non-jews
millions dead in Iraq

42 dead, mass murderer Goldman LOVED by jews

serial killer of 13 Christians

the REAL terrorists--not a single one is an Arab

serial killers are all jews

framed Christians for anti-semitism, got caught
left 350 firemen behind to die in WTC

legally insane debarred lawyer CENSORED free speech

mother of all fnazis, certified mentally ill

10,000 Whites DEAD from one jew LIE

moser HATED by jews: he followed the law

f.ck Jesus--from a "news" person!!

1000 fold the child of perdition

 

Hit Counter

 

Modified Saturday, March 11, 2017

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party