Without sounding like a total cocksucker, my IQ is around 135, I think. I took the multi-day test as a teen with a psychometrician/psychologist. My results correlate with the Mensa progressive matrices I've taken as an adult, so I think it's accurate. 135 is nothing amazing; many here are higher, I'm sure. I mention this shit because reading psychometrics lately blew my mind at shit I never recognized.
Throughout my life, I've struggled getting people to understand concepts simple to me. It frustrated me that no amount of references/data/explaining made them understand. The average white IQ is 100. It's theorized that with a 2 standard deviation gap (30 points), communication breakdown is likely when explaining "complex" concepts. The higher IQ (HIQ) person speaks another language to the lower IQ person (LIQ).*
Conversely, LIQ's suggestions are often steps instantly ruled out by HIQ as irrelevant. Explaining this is impossible to LIQ because ruling out their best strategy instantly is like black magic. They genuinely can't conceive of the abstract thinking taking place that quickly lets you jump ahead and invalidate their strategy in seconds. They simply don't have these shortcuts available.
So they think HIQ is an idiot for dismissing their input "without even thinking about it." This breeds resentment where LIQ regards HIQ as an egotistical know-it-all. If HIQ's approach yields positive results, LIQ believes they merely guessed correctly since HIQ ignored such obvious first steps. If HIQ's approach results in a poor result, LIQ believes he's proven right, ignorant to the flaws in result-oriented thinking. The idea that optimal strategy frequently results in less-than-stellar outcomes is lost on LIQ, but not HIQ. Thus, HIQ correctly defends the "losing play" as the correct one, reinforcing to LIQ that HIQ is a confused, stubborn idiot.
*I always thought, "I just need to prepare the data differently or find a more analogous scenario." But it's a hardware issue; people of average intelligence cannot juggle the variables required to understand certain connections. This 2xSD gap between boss and subordinate is often recognized as detrimental because LIQ workers can't understand HIQ leader's strategy and lose faith in his leadership. College professors do best when they're a bit closer to the students IQ range, too.
Similarly, for LIQ (at certain ranges), there's no difference between what is true and what is claimed true. If everybody agrees it's true, that's truth. Rooted in the need for social cohesion—which makes sense—it affects women most. They'll especially lash out when you differ from group consensus on issues that can harm the "marginalized." Pointing out reality to them, especially showing their support for a cause actually harms people (especially women), is never well-received. It's not taken as helpful information to recalibrate their concern, but an attack on them as a person (or an admission of your own moral deficits).
It's never received as a friendly, "Your data is incorrect, resulting in your compassion being misdirected. But here is better information for you." It's either, "You are dumb for believing this shit" or, "I'm someone who lacks compassion for the cause you support." LIQ will find it unreal that you can't see what's obvious to them ("Hey, trans-women are 'women' and deserve compassion!"); HIQ are no different ("Sure, but they're actually men and will still murder you. Without a falsifiable test on who is who who isn't 'trans', you're providing a loophole for Ted Bundy to join you in the bathroom stall. Why don't you get this?"). It's just a breakdown I never considered is often linked to actual cognitive capabilities, not stubbornness on their end.
To me, it's absurd not to fact-check and put effort into knowing what is true. Being corrected is never frustrating or an ego-check for me. It's someone providing me the opportunity to be correct. It's wonderful. Realizing most people are incapable of researching properly was a hard pill to swallow. But now I'm hit with the reality that many literally can't recognize truth is independent of what everybody asserts as truth? JFC.
No wonder telling my friends that "men aren't women" is a monkey wrench into their belief system. "If 'trans people don't exist', why do doctors and scientists overwhelmingly say so?" Fucking radical leftist ideologues, man.
