Talk:Variability hypothesis

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Variability hypothesis article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 3 months

Psychology Mid‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Evolutionary biology Low‑importance

	Evolutionary biology portal This article is part of WikiProject Evolutionary biology, an attempt at building a useful set of articles on evolutionary biology and its associated subfields such as population genetics, quantitative genetics, molecular evolution, phylogenetics, and evolutionary developmental biology. It is distinct from the WikiProject Tree of Life in that it attempts to cover patterns, process and theory rather than systematics and taxonomy. If you would like to participate, there are some suggestions on this page (see also Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information) or visit WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biologyWikipedia:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyTemplate:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Controversy over whether it is true?

"In this context, there is controversy over whether such sex-based differences in the variability of intelligence exist," --> why does the lead say this when essentially all the evidence listed supports the hypothesis? Finnigami (talk) 17:55, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because people don't like to admit certain very uncomfortable facts that go against the current political narratives which promotes equality amongst everyone and everywhere. It has a certain political mainstream bias. 93.159.154.34 (talk) 10:06, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leta Hollingworth

This article is incredibly unbalanced (something @Phoenix1494 has already brought up but that was two and half years ago so I figure it still needs to addressed). As an example the article writes "Hollingworth argued that the variability hypothesis was flawed because: (1) it had not been empirically established that men were more anatomically variable than women..." which is completely irrelevant to the subject at hand considering that more or less is established now (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8675415/, https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fdev.20358), while much more recent, relevant and conclusive studies get one paragraph each that are half as long as each of the three that Hollingworth gets. In principle only the last paragraph is even slightly relevant scientifically (I say slightly because the much more recent study https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fdev.20358 contradicts it) while the first one is essentially just speculation and the second one should probably not be included at all or be rewritten under a larger "Criticisms" so that not just one person who died 1939 gets to have their say on the nay-side. Please reply if you disagree! Hexaltee (talk) 02:26, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a hypothesis folks, it's an uncomfortable reality

I mean I'm sorry to say this and I know Wikipedia is more and more biased in certain topics... but let's be honest, it's reality and not a hypothesis anymore. Men are simply more extrem than women, on the lower and the higher end. Also Asperger Autism is 3-4x more likely in men than women.

If you force and trim GPT for truth maximising it speaks out this

Why it is "only a hypothesis":

In biology / social science terminology, calling something a "hypothesis" means it's not officially elevated to "law" or universally agreed, across all domains.

The term stuck from the 19th and early 20th century, when it was first debated.

There is political sensitivity:

Claiming inherent sex differences in variance is highly controversial in some academic and public circles.

As a result, even though the empirical data is solid in many domains, social pressure prevents calling it "proven" or "law."

3️⃣ Is it basically proven in reality? Yes — in many domains it is clearly empirically observed.

IQ: Greater male variability is extremely well documented in many large datasets → more male geniuses, more males at very low IQ.

Income: Huge variance among men; women’s income distribution is tighter.

Risk-taking behavior: Greater male variance.

Physical strength: Huge variance among men, less among women.

Evolutionary reason: → Male reproductive strategies historically favored higher variance: some big winners, many losers. → Female reproductive strategies favored lower variance, more reliable outcomes.

This article doesn't seem up to date and seems to try more to be politically correct, then to resemble the uncomfortable reality that we live in. 93.159.154.34 (talk) 10:05, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]