What's the genetic distance between men and women?

literally one chromosome.

nigger has more in common with Icelander than with nigger female

>>77173014
one chromosome is a lot
but the gamechanger is week 11

16 cm

>>77173014
Damn.

tits vaginas and dick

File: 3DecBrainGraphic.jpg (51KB, 564x353px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 564x353px

>>77172991
it depends on how you classify genetic distance.

are you talking about the sum of genes/shared genes? or active/used genes that are being expressed?

if its shared genes, pakianon is correct, literally one chromosome is the difference.

if its active genes being expressed its complex and not measurable but there are substantial hidden differences between females. IE brains are organized very differently with females tending towards "balanced" brains and thicker cortices (more intelligent, on average, overall) while males have stronger frontal lobes and asymmetries.
males will be stronger at specific things much in the same way aspies tend to have brain super-powers but females will be smarter generally due to having thicker/more connected brains.

gas urself u brainless idiot

>>77173429

>but females will be smarter generally due to having thicker/more connected brains.

No this is so wrong. Women are not smarter than men on average or in any other way.
They are more socially adjusted sure and that matters in education but they don't do better in any objective measurement of true intelligence.

>>77173466
go home, Ireland. you are washed out ...

>>77173043
didn't imply it wasn't a lot. One chromosome also happens to be the distance between a sane man and a man with downs

File: 1482741571067.jpg (105KB, 1200x891px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1200x891px

>>77173429

I mean the raw genetic distance.

The difference between east Asians and Euros is 0.10 (not sure what units that is). The difference between Indians and Euros is something like 0.04.

I have no idea what these differences mean with respect to chromosomal data. It seems possible that men could be less genetically related to women than different races are to each other.

>>77174387
>I have no idea what these differences mean with respect to chromosomal data. It seems possible that men could be less genetically related to women than different races are to each other.
That's an interesting question. Behaviourally an Indian male is closer to a Euro male than to an Indian female, minus the street shitting.

>>77173429

That image is such pseudoscientific bullshit

the image is correct, but the need to unwarrantedly relate it to other gender differences is reddit tier

spatial cognition is promoted by low testosterone, but is better in men.

>>77174387

>I have no idea what these differences mean with respect to chromosomal data.

Nothing. Sex chromosomes are ignored.

>>77174438

nah senpai

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jgeU0GTxF4

>>77174577

That seems rather arbitrary. Genetic relatedness should be based on total relatedness.

>>77174692

Far from arbitrary actually. What if a sample set has 200 women and 100 men and another one 300 men?

>>77174883

So what? If the X/Y chromosome corresponds to a large genetic difference, measures should reflect that.

If you're trying to say it's useful to exclude to track population migrations or whatever, fine. But objective difference is objective, and should include ALL genes that are present.