/lit/ - Literature

>>16991986
>Are there any legitimate, unbiased books on female psychology from an evolutionary perspective
no

Nt evolution but Nen are from Mars, Woman are from Venus says that woman derive joy from social interaction and expressing feelings and men dont

>>16991995
Fuck. Cause it's driving me crazy, man. I'm getting bitter in a way I don't want to be.

>>16992001
It goes beyond that. Women in relationships flirt with me all the time and get pissed when I ignore them, and they have no intention of sleeping with me. It's like they get off on thinking I jerk off over them.

>>16992005
Nobody will ever write a wholly unbiased book about that, and trying to do so in the current feminist climate is just a joke. Read the basics of evopsych/sociobiology, then try to come to your own conclusions. It will always remain speculative anyway, evolutionary biology is inherently speculative, and evopsych especially so.

>>16992017
If you want an evolutionary perspective on it you could argue that women have evolved to select the most dominant men for producing strong >>16992017
offspring and that they're more than willing to cheat on their partners if they feel they are inadequate

mother nature by sarah hrdy

If the wording was more timid and didn't reach its logical conclusions
Otto Weininger is pretty much in line with everything modern evolutionary psychologists say
Evolutionary psychology is of course nonsense though so read books on female biology and psychology instead
Our guy Charlie Murray wrote a book that has a lengthy session of sex differences that might be of interest
It's surprisingly well researched

>>16991986
>>16992049
>evolutionary
Unfalsifiable THEORY
>psychology
Even more unfalsifiable bullshit and it’s the field most affected by the reproducibility crisis.

>>16991986
Anything by David Buss

>>16991986
Stop trying to understand female minds bro. They don't even understand themselves and are completely incapable of ever doing so. Just observe their actions and make decisions based on that.

Yeah, ATTENTION is and always has been the sole and main thing I don’t understand AT ALL about women. I don’t understand how real it is for them, or how they even quantify it. If it wasn’t for ATTENTION I think I’d say I can relate to women but since it’s a thing – no, I definitely don’t. I think women enjoy attention more than actual sex. I think it’s the idea that they have men’s eyes and minds on them, because your goal as a woman is to get that, and most of your self-worth is derived from whether men approve of you.

In fact, you know what it reminds me of? You know how tons of black people make reaction vids on YouTube and people actually watch them? It makes me think of that. That women aren’t as interested in the original video (their lives), but that they’re more interested in the reaction video. They’re more interested in the reaction and approval of those they think are “cooler” or “superior.” It’s like how whenever someone is interested in another, whenever something funny happens they’ll immediately look to the person they’re interested in to see if they laughed. This is all backed by the fact that studies have suggested men have little to no diminishment in quality of living when they’re not near women for extended periods of time, but women become depressed when you isolate them from men.

Sex and character

>>16992888
>Studies
Kek. Sounds like some scientistcel cope.

>>16991986
Just read human paychology and judge females individually

>>16992930
Based and nitpickpilled

>>16991986
These generalisations are retarded. I know women who hate bringing attention to themselves and I know men that take every opportunity to do so. Any book or study trying to look at human nature as if it is a monolith is doomed to fail.

>>16992957
Shhh. Don't tell them. They think theyre intelligently using "pattern recognition." Human psychology is what OP is looking for...because...women are humans.

>>16992957
>>16993011
t. Losers with no experience

>>16991986
Nope, you won't find anything nowadays because
>MUH WAMEN ARE EQUAL TO MEN AND IF YOU DISAGREE YOU'RE A BIGOT

>>16993026
Lel. The irony

Most men are disposable. Most women are disposable.

>>16992957
Have you actually read "Sex and Character"? Its first half is literally the author explaining why you should treat "woman" and "man" as pure forms, and actual humans are only "manly" and "womanly" in some proportion.

>>16993011
It is pretty unlikely that women and men have the same psychology, given that women get pregnant and raise children, and men hunt and fight. They would have evolved different psychological profiles to suit these behaviors.

>>16993066
All of which is covered in human psychology.

No doubt there are differences. Far more similarities though.

>>16993081
Well if someone wants to 'understand women' it would be the differences he'd want to look at. I think our current academia is not very disposed to look into this subject.

>>16993047
The irony = (She’s a woman and is retarded)

>>16993092
I don't know man, a quick google search for academic gender psychology produced quite a few universities with Gender and Feminist Psychology

>>16991986
Men need attention too dipshit

>>16991995
found the hole
just read psychoanalysis op

>>16991986
this is what I wanted to find in Lacan but could not find. It's impossible to find a nonbiased perspective. Judging by how this thread is panning out, I think you should just settle for finding a biased one.

>>16993117
I think they have a bit of an...agenda about not finding differences.

>>16993119
yeah, I think the principal difference is women GET attention. that may be the source of OP's bitterness.

I dont understand why anyone regards evolutionary psychology as a science. It seems to be a practice where you imagine scenarios that you reckon make sense, and call it a conclusion.

>>16992957
Hope she sees this bro

>>16993141
That's actually all of evolutionary biology. There is literally no way to know why stuff evolved, you just have to make up a story that seems to make sense.

>>16993119
>>16993140
(Women)

We really don’t

>>16993117
>academic gender psychology produced quite a few universities with Gender and Feminist Psychology
anon was asking about science, not communist propaganda
>>16993092
I can't give a honest answer because the communists will harass any academic recommended but you can start with Otto Weininger's "Sex and Character"

>>16993155
You're an autist browsing an anonymous forum for autists. You don't speak for men.

>>16991986
Don't be a retard OP, we all want attention, men just don't get it at the scale women do because we're not as sexualized.

>>16993153
Evolution is observable

Girls are stupid lol :)
I like the nice ones tho

>>16993157
Wait so academics are communists. You cant reccomend accademics BECAUSE of communists though? Very interesting.

>>16993172
So is psychology. But why an anatomical or psychological feature evolved, you can't know, you can only make up a story that seems plausible.

>>16993131
Source?

>>16993169
I’m a man and this is the first time I’ve been on in years. And I’ll be off soon enough

>>16993188
My source is that the entire Feminist movement is based around the idea that women are 'as capable of men'. It doesn't exactly promote incentives to find differences in psychology or ability between the two sexes.

>>16993179
you fail at basic logic
if the state wasn't stealing honest people's money and pumping it to you, you'd have been beaten to death or died from hunger LONG ago

>>16993186
Things don't evolve for a purpose. We know for a fact that mutations happen naturally at random, and most of them are undesirable and end up getting bred out of the gene pool. When the environment changes the ones with beneficial mutations are more successful at surviving and passing their genes than the other ones.

>>16993225
Yes but we don't why a given anatomical or psychological feature we observe in a current organism conferred a reproductive benefit in the ancestral environment. We have to guess, make up a story.

>>16993200
I'm talking about psychology courses at major universities. Your claim lacks breadth. You could attempt to claim that these courses are promoting a feminist agenda, but you're not convincing without proof.
>>16993205
Virgin hands typed this. I've never lost a fight or been unemployed in my life. Assume what you will, I know you deeply unhappy types require comforting assumptions about others. Projection in a post about psychology. Beautiful

>>16993260
Sure my claim is not convincing to you, I don't really care, it is pretty obvious to the rest of us that a university system that is full of feminists is not going to honestly investigate sex differences, or if they do the research will be very obscure.

>>16993297
Well, it's a commonly parroted narrative, I'll grant you that. It has no substance however. It's just a flimsy justification for anti-intellectualism

>>16993307
here is an example of what i mean
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/687863
>For centuries scientists have claimed that women are intellectually inferior to men and blacks are inferior to whites. Although these claims have been contested and corrected for centuries, they still continue to be made. Meanwhile, scientists have documented the harm done to women and blacks by the publication of such claims. Can anything be done to improve this situation? Freedom of research is universally recognized to be of first-rate importance. Yet, constraints on that freedom are also universally recognized. I consider three of these constraints and argue for tighter restrictions on race- and gender-related cognitive differences research on their basis.

>>16992736
She was a cute tomboy, such a shame what she have done to herself.

>>16993316
Your paper is subscription locked.
Still, advocating tighter more rigorous study sounds exactly opposite to what you're implying. Also, is this a widely accepted academic position? I doubt it.

>>16993342
Makes you wonder what happened to her during childhood or something. Pic extremely related.

>>16993350
>tighter more rigorous study
That's not what it's suggesting, look
>Freedom of research is universally recognized to be of first-rate importance. Yet, constraints on that freedom are also universally recognized.

You agree that it is not really acceptable in polite society or in academia especially to claim that the races and sexes differ cognitively on average? Do you not think this discourages research into the subject, and makes people try to publish findings that support the equality narrative? There are some findings of course that show differences between races and sexes, both in brain measures, and in psychometry, but it's not very fashionable stuff, and there aren't many people doing it.

>>16993375
>Brain measures
Same shit Jack Thompson tried on to ban Vidya. Fuck off Trump lost.

>>16993375
I thought it was fairly accepted to note that cognitive differences exist. Just not acceptable to make it singularly about race or sex, when there are many other factors that cause significant changes in these areas. I think many are researching and studying it, receiving funding to do so as well.

>>16993395
Yes for example, the sexes have different amounts and placements of grey matter relatively, races have different brain volumes both absolutely and when adjusted for body weight, and so on.

>>16993413
Fuck off psuedoscientist you want to ban porn, Vidya etc. Trump lost.

>>16993413
There's only a very weak correlation between brain size and intelligence, perhaps if it were a more notable correlation you'd see more people studying it.

>>16993434
I really don't have any opinions on porn or video games, and while Trump is very amusing I'm sure the eternal American circus will produce something just as good soon enough.

Anyway it's not pseudoscience, it's just measurements, they're not even hard to make. It would be pseudoscientific to make claims about what they mean without evidence.

>>16993434
Not him. Nice strawman, you're proving his point.

>>16993455
I'm aware the correlation is weak, I was just giving it as an example of measurements of the brain. There is obviously more going on wrt intelligence than brain size. I'm sure the brain size does mean something though because brains are very energy-costly, it might not even be primarily intelligence, if by that we mean IQ.

>Man strives in everything for a direct domination over things, either by comprehending or by subduing them. But woman is everywhere and always relegated to a merely indirect domination, which is achieved by means of man, who is consequently the only thing she has to dominate directly. Thus it lies in the nature of women to regard everything simply as a means of capturing a man, and their interest in anything else is only simulated, is no more than a detour, i.e. amounts to coquetry and mimicry.
Schopenhauer

>>16993477
Yeah, it seems unlikely considering animal brain sizes compared to perceived intelligence. If we know so little about neuroscience, then why do we use it to explain racial or sexual differences. Doesnt individual experience, work ethic, and childhood development seem to make a much bigger difference in what we generally call intelligence?

>>16993357
best pic ive seen on this site in days
>days
meaning thousands of pics
>sad

>>16993434
Right man, why do you think blacks so often make so great athletes?
Don't you think there might be something... you know, GENETIC about that?


Ib4: They don't have enough opportunities in other fields. Alright lad, this surely may be the SOLE reason.

>>16993509
>Yeah, it seems unlikely considering animal brain sizes compared to perceived intelligence
I'm sure you know the encephalization quotient, it's relative to body mass. Large animals consume a lot more energy in general. The question is actually pretty complicated though from what I understand, due to asymmetries in how things scale. And it's better the more specific your group of animals is.

Anyway brain size is not useful for explaining much, I agree. Right now the most useful test we have is IQ, which is also rather flawed. My guess is that in the coming decades genetics will take over this field and help explain behavioral differences in general, not just intelligence. Might be China that does this rather than the West though. And yes environment, childhood development, etc. all matter of course

>>16993566
Exactly, so why do people act like being racist and sexist and throwing IQ and Darwin around makes their worldview more reasonable or measured? It's the opposite, the thinking man would consider all evidence and quickly discover the flimsiness of these generalizations, and see many more factors that are at play, some of which ARENT immutable. We could improve the worlds average intelligence by focusing on the factors that can be changed. Would this not be better?

>>16993614
I suppose it comes down to whether to consider these things as factors at all or not. There are those who want to ignore them, those that focus only on them, and those that are somewhere in the middle. What would be best? I don't know.

>>16993614
i hope you run out fast of hormone replacement therapy drugs and quickly kys

>>16993716
Seeeeethe incel

>>16993479
>females are the ultimate capitalists
communism is the atom bomb of the female against the male; ironically (or not) the atom bomb kills not only the male females are against but also females and everybody in sight
SAD

>>16993519
Based
>>16993465
You provided no counter argument Brainlet.
>>16993538
>Great athletes
>A few hundred athelete niggers out of a billion brown and black people is statistically relevant
>>16993614
This
>>16993732
Based
>>16993733
Decode this for neurotypicals please

>>16992001
Because this is how you interact with children

>>16992957
C-C-COPE

>>16992957
the only good post itt.
sure there are trends in psychology, and most men and women are naturally adhering to their respective behaviors, but exceptions are very common. as another anon said all people have a mixture of feminine and masculine traits - some predominantly one way or another, some not, or have more traits of the opposite sex (does not make them a troon)

>>16991986
just read books on babies and small children. then switch "baby" and "child" with "woman" and you're in for big revelations.

>>16993732
>>16994002
>feminist think of herself as "neurotypical" kek

Wait.. So none of you have ever met a self-aware woman or a soulless npc man? Not a single one?

>>16994150
Man good. Woman bad. White man 2x good. Black woman 3x bad. Look. Chart. Statistic. No context, context bad. Nuance bad. Me white man, don't have to think, assign value to others immediately. Win. You will never be woman. Top kek.

>>16993342
She unironically needed a masculine man to give he some serious deep dicking filling her hungry womb with alpha Aryan chads. But because she was financially successful in Jewish Clown World she got suckered into the instant gratification of junk food values such as stonk feminism self-indulgence. Jews fear the alpha Aryan has he is god’s will on earth who punish Satan’s Jews. She bought into the sick vile inhuman filth the Satanic Talmudics were selling and now she is going to chop her tits off and call her self Frank.

>>16994179
this, but unironically

>>16994191
Do you know what irony is anon?

>>16994179
>You will never be woman
thanks bro
t. ftm

>>16994118
>human hand usually has 5 fingers
>what's with all the generalizations? Have you heard of polydactyly? Stupid bigot

>>16993505
That is similar to Jews. They lost the ability to thrive in the natural world so they focus their energy on manipulation men in the urban world.

>>16994202
I have not posted in this thread so dont accuse me of being the other fag, but can I ask what you're even arguing?

>>16994202
> 95% people have brown or blue eyes, the fuck are you talking about "green"?

>>16993509
No. IQ Potential in prolly 80% genetic and 20% epigenetic. This is why niggers are BRUTALLY dumb, like savagely retarded.

>>16994229
Hello anon. Do you enjoy the internet? Thank the Nigerian.

>>16993614
You are a dangerous coward. Pretending that the next Newton or Nietzsche is going to come out of nigger talking chimp brutal savage retard Africa is preposterous and you know this at some level. The real world does not care or need your self-stroking good intentions. The real world needs REAL solutions. YOU and your pathetic Jewish submission are the reason the West is deteriorating. And following the West is the rest of the planet and your precious black retard gorilla niggers.

>>16994286
>>16994253
Hi there anon. Look at this 160 IQ black man.

>>16994144
Is the guy on the right there strictly for the retard pussy?

>>16994286
Hey there anon. Did Newton revolutionize space travel?

>>16994293
Look how fucking white that guy is lol. That is

>>16994314
I love joggers

>>16994286
>>16994328
I'm sorry, did you say something? Here's another 160 IQ black man. He's young too, probably has already accomplished more than you or any of your white family.

>>16994336
They've accomplished ao much, whats not to love. Here's a darker picture of Percy to inspire the more melanoid anons.

>>16994340
You are owned like a slave. Imagine being this sensitive to another race who lacks the intellectual capacity to be this sensitive to its own offspring

>>16992112
>unfalsifiable
I don't think you know what this word means

>>16994353
But they raised white children so well when their affluent parents refused to do so. Did you know they even nursed white children. Incredible compassion.

>>16994286
damn

>>16994354
>Here's a darker picture of Percy
Not the anon you are replying to but you are coming across as desperate. Maybe you should go outside and reevaluate your purpose in this a magical life.

>>16994286
Holy shit this is fucking brutal lol

>>16994286
I don’t want to believe this but it do

>>16994396
I'm having fun though anon. Hey, have you met Dorothy Vaughn? NASA'S first "human computer." She was mighty impressive.

>>16994299
>assuming the gender

>>16994422
Oops, I accidentally posted black female aerospace engineer Mary Jackson Small instead of the venerable Mathematician Dorothy Vaughn, here they are pictured along side Katherine Johnson, who if not for her, space travel would not have been possible.

>>16994438
>this is my religion
The post

>>16991986
Neumann's The Great Mother
Amor and Psyche
The Fear of the Feminine (really fucking hard to find online, but a great read)

Also want to echo the guy who suggested Weininger's investigations into femininity in S&C, guy is really fucking incisive and sharp. At a meta level he's also a pretty good counterpart to Neumann as a case study of the male ego's development and its failure to overcome its inherent fear of the feminine, which Neumann holds results in self-deprecation and ultimately suicide. Neumann explicitly mentions him in Origins and History of Consciousness as such a person.

Choice quotes:
>Devaluation of the Earth, hostility towards the Earth, fear of the Earth: these are all from the psychological point of view the expression of a weak patriarchal consciousness that knows no other way to help itself than to withdraw violently from the fascinating and overwhelming domain of the Earthly.
>Woman's fear of the female Self, of the experience of the numinous archetypal Feminine, becomes comprehensible when we get a glimpse - or even only a hint – of the profound otherness of female selfhood as contrasted to male selfhood. Precisely that element which, in his fear of the Feminine, the male experiences as the hole, abyss, void, and nothingness turns into something positive for the woman without, however, losing these same characteristics.

Neumann is probably the greatest insight into postmodern millenial and zoomer sexual dynamics I've ever stumbled upon. Give the guy a shot if you're interested.

>>16994002
>>Great athletes
>>A few hundred athelete niggers out of a billion brown and black people is statistically relevant
I mean compared with the whites in the same sports, dumbass.

>>16991986
>from an evolutionary perspective
Wrong tool for the job. Almost always is. You'll advance in many areas of thinking by understanding why.

>>16994181
I feel sad, bro. Such a waste.

>>16994120
>just read books on babies and small children. then switch "baby" and "child" with "woman" and you're in for big revelations.
Recc me something.

>>16994438
>if not for her, space travel would not have been possible
They'd just have hired someone else

>>16994438
>if not for her, space travel would not have been possible.
Yep, If not her and so many other people.

>>16995099
>>16995164
Look at her specific contribution, no one else was coming close to the formula she created at the time. I do agree though, history is mostly small developments made by the nameless workers generation after generation adding integral but minor improvements just for the few elites to profit from.

>>16994144
>>16994713
Do you have any statistics to back that up?

>>16994948
Why he’s right though, maybe a bit hyperbolic but none the less he’s essentially right

>>16995276
How do you know? People aren't always controlled by some evil outside force. She may have reached the conclusion organically. It isn't as if it's some new phenomenon.

>>16995091
The Complete Book of Christian Parenting and Child Care

But anything would work. here form a random search first pdf that came up:
Take the time to communicate. If you have been separated from your wife all day, debriefing with her is far more important than browsing through the evening paper or watching the six o’clock news. This is particularly important if she is caring for small WOMEN at home, since most women crave adult conversation after a day full of WOMEN talk. You can begin with the simple “How was your day?” type of questions—and pay attention to the answers—but on a regular basis (weekly, if not more often) both of you should also ask and answer some important “checking in” questions as well (...)

although this focuses on the wife. The real insight is when you replace the baby parts.

>>16992736
Observation without understanding is futility.

>>16991986
>>16992017
>>16992888
>>16992957
Men fail to understand woman because they don't acknowledge the asymmetry in male and female relationships. Women are literally not capable of surviving and reproducing without some form of assistance because of the burden of childbirth. She is compelled by biology (and evolution has allowed her to become an expert) to satisfy her needs through the provision a man supplies to her in exchange for reproductive access. Hence, the male is valuable because of his labor and status (why women like older men in suits), while the female is valuable because of her reproductive potential (hence why men like younger women without clothes). For the woman's survival, it is necessary that she obtains access to a man who will act on her behalf as a proxy. To control a man, the woman must control his attention. If your man pays attention to other women, it's a signal that you are about to lose him. This is why woman shame men for being attracted to women, and slut shame other women, and why women need constant attention from the other sex. It is also why women spend more time looking at other women than they do men. Here's a supplementary video. Watch it and be cleansed of your ignorance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBgcjtE0xrE

>>16993172
retard

>>16995415
You're the retard if you think otherwise.

>>16992957
>>16993011
cringe

>>16991986
>evolutionary perspective
This whole field has been debunked

>>16995500
Brainlet NPC detected

>>16995502
>the idea that we evolved has been debunked
ok lol. unless you think our behavior is magic and can be divorced from the rest of us it evolved too

>>16994438
They did manual calculations that white people didn't want to do, i.e. retard work.

>>16995389
This. Also that is one base Karen (video)

>>16995288
Good luck willfully misinterpreting females and pretending Jews don’t hate you at a biological level. Honestly, good luck with that.

>>16991986
Are there any legitimate, unbiased books on male psychology from an evolutionary perspective? Why do men need sex? seem to need sex like women need comfort.

>>16995538
Evo psych is nothing but just so stories.

>>16995606
You're such a sad parody of a human

>>16995653
Image being so weak, such a pure follower, that you turn your pattern recognition off and disregard the pattern recognition of some of the greatest men that have enabled your söy comfortable existence. You are forced to attack character, play the pseud, fake the higher ground all because you are a coward lol. The ressentiment you must feel arguing with anyone free of mind and uncensored by the publicly allowed discourse of NPC cattle.

>>16995653
>>16995642
>>16995629
Here's another nugget of truth. Why does the simp appear at every online discussion about women in order to sling mud at anyone who doesn't worship women but acknowledges the good and bad in women and seeks to understand them? The simp believes that women are objects that need to be protected. Because he has been brainwashed by feminism he suppresses this belief and unconsciously projects it onto others. Hence, any discussion of women by men is framed as the objectification of women by men. Meanwhile, the simp acts out his belief that women are objects by fighting a figurative battle to protect them from the male oppressors he finds online. Likewise, the male feminist believes that women are weak, and suffers from his perception of his own inferiority. Truly, the male feminist identifies with the weakness which he projects onto women, and as a defense mechanism against his own inferiority, he is compelled to protect women from imaginary oppressors.

>>16995389
Did you just reply to my actual original take with the most basic retarded irrelevant take ever? Yes we all know this you fucking moron

>>16995642
Did you even read my post? You either accept that we evolved or you don't. Psychology is not magically different than the rest of the organism.

>>16995761
Your prose is stultifyingly stupid and quotidian. Read books, lurk less. sincerely.

>>16994150
Nobody in this thread has met anyone or done anything substantial outside of the Internet. Literally their entire "experience" of life is second-hand.

>>16995825
Projection I'm guessing

>>16995717
I have better pattern recognition than you faggots. I think my body of information is larger as I've actually met women lmfao. If I was a coward I would probably search relebtlessly for comfortable delusions and charts that suit my internal biases. I'm a philosopher at heart anon, I just can't help but think about things logically. I can't live a false reality based on echo chambers and propaganda like you slave mentality fragile faggots. Get fucked.

>>16995778
>>16995821

>>16995897
You do have comfortable delusions, also who says stuff like 'im a philosopher at heart'

>>16995897

>>16995943
I deal with my biases. You relish in yours. The picture is hilarious tho nice work

>>16993191
Spoke like a true incel

>>16995982
I don't think you deal with your biases at all, I can actually consider both sides of this issue, I think you can only consider one.

>>16996448
Well then you're comoletely wrong.

>>16992888
>You know how tons of black people make reaction vids on YouTube and people actually watch them?
When did that become a black people thing, anon?

>>16991986
Dunbar, Robin, et al. Evolutionary Psychology: A Beginner's Guide.
Vilar, Esther. The Manipulated Man. First edition

>>16993011
Well there are key differences in psychology like female sexuality, sexual attraction and effect on psychology of the menstrual cycle. You're just a butthurt whore/male feminist

>>16995778
>my original take
retard, stop embarassing yourself

>unbiased
>asks for books to confirm his biases

youre really something arent?

>>16996898
Yeah I adressed that. You suck. At everything. Failure

The issue with armchair psychologists pontificating on human mating strategies and preferences is that everyone puts it in some purely wild, biological lens and ignores all the other factors that go into people fucking,. Most incels brains fall apart once they are confronted with the fact that a large percentage of people view sex as a social thing.

My deeply autistic roommate had some chick over the other night who was easily twice my weight. The man genuinely believes that knowing how to flatter fat chicks with low esteem into soulless, mechanical sex makes him a regular Casanova. He even calls me an actual fag for having standards.

i have had more in depth discussions about literature, politics, and world history with women than men

>>16997242
Idk man honestly I ight agree with this. In my experience women are more into reading than men are. Most men I know would rather talk about sports or TV or video games than books or anything deep. How does the whole incel psychology theory explain that?

>>16997275

>He doesn't occasionally plow a porker

It requires 0 effort and in the dark all pussy feels the same. I think it is you who are deeply autistic.

>>16991986
>unbiased books on female psychology from an evolutionary perspective

That statement disgusts me
Are there any books that totally refute the concept of biological determinism?

>>16997292
haha waht

>>16997222
What was your rebuttal when he called you a fag?

>>16997292
No dude her skin literally feels like leather

>>16997391
I said I'd rather be fag than fuck farm animals

>>16992736
That's what women want you to believe.

Just read the rational male by Tomassi, yes, unironically.

>>16993119
The difference is in the quantity they need and the centrality of it in their lives.

>>16993153
If they obfusciate instead of clearify: it's a wamen.

Show tits or gtfo.

You can't be absolutely certain of anything in science, it's degree of certainty dumb femcel

>>16993455
Brain size is the best anatomical correlate to intelligence, it explains about 15% of the variance in intelligence.

Women have 150 grams less brain tissue, 100 grams after correcting for length (which is already unnecessary but ok), 17% less brain cells, 5 less IQ points when adult and a smaller standard deviation of their IQ. The more extreme you go on the IQ scale, the less women there are. They are designed to be mediocre. This is not controversial.

>>16994340
>>16994354
>>16994314
>>16994293
>>16994253
Living proof that melanoids do not comprehend statistics. You guys are dumber on average, as a group. Of course there are some smart blacks.

160 IQ as a kid will almost always decline hugely because IQ is relative to current age, he'll end up at 140 or so (which is still smart). His IQ is partly due to his intelligence, but blacks just mature faster too. Next to that, all child prodigies have almost always a huge component of faster maturation in them, which means it's not all adult intelligence influencing their IQ.

>>16997705
*obfuscate, a typing error that makes me look retarded

>>16997301
none can because it is true

>>16996916
Call me retard again and I may have to linguistically dismantle you

>>16992957
you’re retarded, generalizations are based

>>16997733
Oh noooo. 5 IQ pointerinos. Reeeee!!!!

>>16997747
All of those are highly influential adults now though?

>>16991986
Love how he says unbiased and probably just means a book written about women by a man

>>16997492
Kinda weak desu

>>16992005
listen to patrice o'neal. no book's gonna help

>>16995389
Male of female, I am increasingly certain that the only way out is to completely escape our terrestrial biology.

>>16995272
>Do you have any statistics to back that up?
Just look at any NBA game.