I know many women, too, who feel acutely aware of their economic circumstances and how they differ from those of their peers. And I know many women who are only on the property ladder because they married “well” to a man with an inheritance – of the three-bed semi variety as opposed to a great estate in Derbyshire, but still.
This is the bird who rose to prominence writing a fiercely feminist blog, recall. Marrying for a 3 bed in Pinner, eh?
For celebrities and influencers, and certain literary types, I suppose it’s true. I do wonder if this has trickled down to comprehensive schools, though. From my conversations with teenage girls, some of whom still feel a need to hide their intelligence to avoid teasing or even bullying, I suspect not. I think back to those years and remember how painfully self-conscious I was: both about how I looked (big eyes, freckles, flat chest) and how clever I was. Even typing the word “clever” in relation to myself felt hard just now, more than 25 years later. Admitting to it wasn’t something you did.
And that? It’s the other birds who do the teasing and bullying, no? Teenage blokes don’t – well, from distant memory they don’t – know nor care if a bird’s clever or not.
Having an IQ between 110-130 seems to be the Cursed Zone of Dunning-Kruger. Bright enough to learn how to pass exams, bright enough to be opinionated, not bright enough to realise they’ve learned complete belming nonsense, not bright enough to have the proper humility dust motes on a pebble rotating around a spark should have when faced with the outrageous extravagance of the observable universe as seen by Hubble or James Webb’s Deep Field.
It’s why the Green Party does well in towns benighted with “yoonis”.
Is it clever to write an article in The Guardian about how clever you are? Case closed.
The D-K effect occurs across all levels of IQ when people assess their own skills in specific areas like logic, grammar, social intelligence, problem-solvingability, etc. The greatest overestimation occurs in IQ range 55-80, and the lowest overestimation in the IQ range 130-150.
The majority of women are in the IQ range 90-110. The minimum IQ level for ‘professional’ occupations is thought to be 115. At IQ 125, men outnumber women by 3:1; at IQ 170, by 35:1. In the IQ range 55-80, men outnumber women by c.2:1.
One down vote. Obviously, a low IQ individual. Is Spud reading this blog?
Ah yes. The 55-80 IQ range. Anyone who has ever watched a border collie repeatedly trying to carry a three foot long stick through a two foot six inch wide gate will be familiar with the limitations within this range, and the inability of its holders to recognise those limitations.
And then look at average sub-Saharan IQs:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222062631_The_Average_IQ_of_Sub-Saharan_Africans_Comments_on_Wicherts_Dolan_and_Van_der_Maas
The reason the Green Party does well in university towns is that people with IQs in double figures are now admitted to ‘yoonis’…not that an IQ between 110-130 is the Cursed Zone of Dunning-Kruger. See my comment below…
Oh can it not be both? Look at Parliament, for example. Lots of people just clever enough to sound vaguely plausible if you didn’t know anything about the subject they’re opining on, not clever enough to understand anything.
I think Spud is angry at your implication it’s all the thickies’ fault. Our society isn’t run by thickos, but by midwits.
The number 1 filter for parliament is people with the money to do it, and not much talent in anything else.
It’s not a job that pays particularly well, and the average MP isn’t going to do much to change the world. You’ll spend all your time doing dumb fucking shit like the price of football shirts or choo-choos. Most Labour MPs are low level people doing the bidding of unions. Most Conservatives are rich boys (spouse or parents).
If you have talent, why would you be an MP rather than running a hedge fund? Hedge fund is probably more interesting, you earn more money, and no-one is scrutinising your private life.
Statistically, IQ 110-130 is not prime Dunning-Kruger territory, but, yes, there will be a significant number of D-Ks in that bracket. The higher the IQ, though, the lower the percentage of D-Ks – but then the ‘clever sillies’ problem appears, D-K being only one form of stupidity.
And, yes, we are governed by mid-wits – IQ range 85-115, the band in which 68% of the population fall. We have 263 women in Parliament – most of whom (probably the vast majority?) are likely to be in the 90-110 range – many lower, see example below. Of Parliament as a whole – men and women – only 10% will have an IQ of 120 or more. Politics has always attracted mid-wits, but it now attracts very few people of high ability as a career.
Fucking hellski, is that an MP? We really aren’t a serious country.
I fear there may well be worse to come…
…
“Bright enough to learn how to pass exams, bright enough to be opinionated, not bright enough to realise they’ve learned complete belming nonsense, not bright enough to have the proper humility dust motes on a pebble rotating around a spark should have when faced with the outrageous extravagance of the observable universe as seen by Hubble or James Webb’s Deep Field.”
There’s always a certain amount of elite status about their opinions, too, which makes people who haven’t figured it out think that they are clever. They’ll use terms that people don’t understand, refer to things that are hard to analyse. I think of when Will Hutton talks about the Mittelstand in Germany. He could just talk about what they are, but throwing that in makes him sound clever. You get it with people jumping on a new fad, when the proles have caught up with the last fad. Like UPFs or natural wine (filthy, overpriced rubbish).
Much like exams, it’s a lot about rote learning. It’s reading The Guardian so that you know the right opinions to be on about. People I’ve met who are both greenies and hate that Mrs Thatch closed down the pits. How can you believe both things, simultaneously?
If the Graun monkeys had IQs anywhere near 130, it might not be the delusional rag it is.
Maybe, but Karl Marx was no dummy, was he? Just cleversilly.
These dim bulbs ain’t no Marx. Perhaps it’s just as well.
Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett would never have had to play down her cleverness because she’s evidently a dim bulb.
And – ‘anecdata’, I know – my daughter is both intelligent and beautiful. She had two (declined) marriage proposals by the age of 22, is a successful City solicitor-advocate and is now happily married with two young sons…and a £1m mortgage.
Theo. One suspects La Loose Corset’s claiming cleverness because she’s been tested as high IQ.
The minimum IQ level for ‘professional’ occupations is thought to be 115.
That would be the people comprise your political class. Clever?
You may suspect RLC has tested as high IQ, but I doubt it because the evidence is that she’s pretty dim and because IQ measurement is remarkably accurate.
And someone with an IQ of 115 is not “clever”: 85-115 is dim-to-mid-wit level.
I’ve known loads of people test as high IQ, as dim as the Toch H. Like I say, you have entire political class of them. Oxford seems to specialise.
I’ve known loads of people test as high IQ, as dim…
I think what you mean is that you’ve known some people that you assume are high IQ who lacked a competence that you have. No?
Also, why are you so defensive about IQ tests? The evidence for them is overwhelming. And, judging by your contributions here, you are well above average intelligence…
I’d suggest that many of the “professional occupations” are rules based. Lawyering, accountancy, coding, mathematician etc. So the requirement is learning the rules & applying them. And a lot IQ test questions test for that. “Identify the rule here & apply it” Takes a certain sort of person can stand the tedium of learning the rules & derive satisfaction from applying them. In reality that’s on the autistic spectrum.Of course one can realise enormous fun & profit from misleading those sort people that there are rules operating.
I’d further suggest that because the system has been selecting for people like that, it’s becoming increasingly dysfunctional. Sorry, the real world isn’t necessarily rules based. You need people who can think outside of the boxes. A better test would be the Ikea flat pack test. For the highest levels done without the instructions or the picture on the box.
Coding is different from law and accountancy where there are all sorts of complicated, arcane rules. The building blocks, the rules of coding are quite simple. You don’t have to learn much about it to write a program to calculate the next 500 fibonacci numbers. You need to understand about using variables, a little math and a loop. It’s about breaking down the problem to use those building blocks.
It’s also why it isn’t a profession. It’s a trade. There is no qualification required, no guild. Loads of blokes in it are self-taught. People do what works.
And OOTB thinking is very much valued. Especially when you broaden that from coding to software development. People who can be economic in problem solving.
All I test is coding skill, nothing else. I’m not going to talk to anyone that can’t do it already. Any kid with a phone can do code, so there’s no excuse for not trying it. I don’t even care if someone gets syntax wrong. It’s about breaking down the problem.
Learning the rules to apply in standard situations is very different to deciding which rules to apply (or formulate) in non-standard situations
Learning the rules to apply in (say) standard situation S1 is relatively easy; and the application of learned rules to standard situations similar to S1 is also relatively easy. (I put IKEA flat packs in this category. When you’ve done one…)
However, deciding which rules to apply (or formulating new ones) to the (say) rare and unfamiliar situation S201.76… is an altogether different proposition – it requires ‘thinking outside the box’ – and this sort of judgement requires high-level problem-solving ability (ie high IQ) – whether you are a coder, a lawyer, an electrician, a plumber, builder, accountant etc.
I’d agree with your third para, Theo. And that is of course the sort of thinking we’re not seeing.
I do find it interesting that we far more adherence to Gerbil Wormery amongst the “professional” classes than we do with the artisans. The former don’t question the paradigms, the latter do far more. Same with DEI.
25 years later? There’s some good advice on that, it’s called “getting the fuck over it”. I got bullied a bit too at school, being a weedy, somewhat clever bloke. Funny how that went away when the critical exams came up. And funny how the girls got one to one tutoring and the arseholes didn’t.
I can barely remember any of their names now.
I was quite good at English as well as getting people in the scrum so my nickname was Raffles, the Gentleman Thug.
Could have been worse, one of my mates was known, even to teachers, as Jungle Bunny.
Tim doesn’t like the use the term ‘Jungle Bunny’ – apparently, it’s reminiscent of the National Front…or something. But his blog, his rules…
Oh. Well it wasn’t a racialist joke, just the truth, and innocent of any malice. JB is a successful lawyer last I heard. Not that I would ever go to a high school reunion.
But it’s why I laughed at the stories of Nigel Farage’s school days.
If you don’t look out you’ll have ‘Real Man’ back here wibbling.
Yes, JB, like Chalky, was almost affectionate – once!…
‘Chalky’ was affectionate.
“And I know many women who are only on the property ladder because they married “well” to a man with an inheritance – of the three-bed semi variety as opposed to a great estate in Derbyshire, but still.”
I’m sure that RLC knows lots of women who live around London, work in media or publishing, and they all think they’re “clever” even though they’re not bright enough to figure out that bad pay in media + London rents aren’t a great combination.
I know lots of couples in houses where she’s a call centre supervisor or a hairdresser, and he fixes HVAC, or is a plumber. £180K gets you a 2 bed in a reasonable part of Swindon. So you need combined earnings of around £50K to afford it. Islington will cost you £700K. So you need over £200K to afford it.
This is why all those non-“clever” people move out of London when they hook up. Live there some years of fun, shagging, then find someone you like and move out. Swindon isn’t the bright lights, big city, but you’re more concerned with space and a park with swings for the kids.
I think we need evidence of that.
Also, is anyone else getting an echo of Murphy? “I’m so clever, but I don’t get the respect or rewards that I deserve”
To be sure, I just looked her up on YT.
And, to be sure, the reason she looks semi-retarded is because there is nothing going on behind the corneas.
Her mind is an intellectual vacuum in which only Guardian feminist memes float, ready to hijack any unfiltered ‘thought’ passing through…
There’s a hint in there about the dreaded social media ‘harms’. Socials allow the mean girls to bully you 24/7. The harms don’t come from an algorithm or porn or propaganda, they come from you classmates, and if you take away the socials they will revert to the old ways. The solution is to toughen up, in preparation for the world.
I well remember when, as a teenage bloke, my initial assessment was based on legs and arse, but also vibes. One quickly came to tell whether the beauty was thick or smart, and for me that was the important difference.
And so I was capable of being simultaneously attracted to the sex object and its engaging, operating brain, which in feminism world I think isn’t supposed to happen, is it?
“They’ve all got a pussy, so find one with a brain as well”.
Not sure who first said that, but I agree with you.
“They’ve all got cocks, so find one with decent earning potential…”??
And for the ladies…
In between bouts of shagging, you’re going to have to talk to them. But I liked actual nerdy/clever/interesting girls.
LRC isn’t actually that clever. She’s the sort of girl that pretends to be clever by making all the right group signals. I’ll bet her expressed tastes, causes and opinions nearly all fit into the Guardian Zone. When has she ever said anything actually interesting, that seems like independent thought?
Clever girls are out there doing their own things. They have opinions that are more subtle. Tastes that are interesting.
Teenage blokes don’t … know nor care if a bird’s clever or not.
At my school you had to have an IQ of 118 to get into the B stream. Which meant that the lassies in the A and B streams were not embarrassingly difficult to talk to. You might be embarrassed for other reasons but not by their being thick. In fact there was one …
Just 118?
Was it hard because she felt guilty about lying?
Nice idea.
But she’s a journalist; lying is what she does.
she may have struggled with the spelling?
This is the credentialed mid-wit problem combined with female bureaucratic positional authority problem. Only going get worse.
Thank you for sharing with us, Lucy. And Guardian.
Why is this in Opinion section? Adolescent ramblings should be in Entertainment section. Better, hidden in a diary.
She notices that state run comprehensives are cess pits of aggressive mediocrity. But offers no corrective options. Maybe grammar schools and a strong independent sector would help.
Some do, maybe, some don’t. I think we need to appoint a Clever Teenage Girl Tsar.
So, so clever. That’s how she ended up writing a column see? Because she was soooo clever. Not smart, mind. The smart girls went into Chemistry and now run labs for companies and make a shit-ton of money and a married to another STEM grad who makes decent money too.