why are women so fucking inferior?

[Anonymous No.15513573]

women have smaller brains than men - https://neurorelay.com/2012/10/07/female-brain-versus-male-brain/
>but anon brain size =/= IQ
It's pure coincidence every great scientist to date has been male, right? and btw, a bigger brain has more in it than a smaller one of the same kind. Therefore more intelligent.

[Anonymous No.15513627]

Imagine being physically AND mentally inferior as well. How could you cope? lmao

[Anonymous No.15513636]

>>15513627
The metaphysical strength women have with regards to their necessity to procreation, lack of outward appearance of arousal, cultural role of taking care of children, and inherent value
This, however, actually anchors them to these roles they have which is why it’s the only thing they think about and why everything only exists in relation to those things. On top of that their value is something they have no real control over and it degrades with time. This causes neuroticism.
Women have so much power, more than men by default, but they’re soooo unequipped to have it.

[Anonymous No.15513639]

>>15513573
>why are women so fucking inferior?
Lack of testosterone.
Same as leftist "men", effeminate-gays, etc.

[Anonymous No.15513656]

>>15513639
>le gay man bad
Alan Turing? Gay men can be just as smart.
>testosterone
>muh strength
Brains overpowers muscle every day of the week. Chimp.

[Anonymous No.15513657]

>>15513636

I understand what you're getting at, because it's a commonplace. But, "metaphysical strength" is a very poor choice to describe it, "biological power" or similar is more accurate. You are describing the mundane social consequences of sexual dimorphism with which we are all so familiar, just a concatenation of physical and psychological phenomena. It's fine to ponder the nature of consciousness and society and so on, but the reason why men and women are different is just a very simple and largely(?) physicalist/structural thing, and therefore it scarcely rises to the level of the "metaphysical".

[Anonymous No.15513672]

>>15513656
>Gay men can be just as smart.
Not effeminate ones.

Case in point, you. You misread and misunderstood the anon's post. KEK!

[Anonymous No.15513694]

>>15513627
>higher college graduates

[Anonymous No.15513713]

>>15513694
>>higher college graduates
Diploma mills
Women rarely have to work, even when single, so more time for socializing in schools that parent's pay for, plus easier for female students to graduate, all they have to do is flirt with professors and suck the occasional dick.

[Anonymous No.15513723]

>>15513694
I saw some of the "research" people had to do for non-STEM courses and it legit looked like something out of middle school

[Anonymous No.15513762]

>>15513573
>it's pure coincidence every great scientist to date has been male, right?
not you though little bitch.

[Anonymous No.15513830]

>>15513694
You must be a woman lmao

[Anonymous No.15513832]

>>15513627
Well they have a large pool of mates at least

[Anonymous No.15513852]

>>15513573
>Women are dumber
Yet they read books 5 times more often then men.

[Anonymous No.15513866]

>>15513852
>more often then men.
>>15513852
>then men
>>15513852
>then
kek

[Anonymous No.15513876]

>>15513656
>>15513672
is fucking twinks in the ass the best base for science/math?

[Anonymous No.15513877]

>>15513852
Do women read any scfi or fantasy?

[Anonymous No.15513909]

Are you asking why in a literal sense? The answer is very simple. Women don't need to be strong or smart because men already are; there's no evolutionary advantage to having smarter and stronger women. In fact, they were actually probably selected for taking up less resources, ie less brain mass (brain activity accounts for a huge portion of caloric usage) and less muscle mass.
The hunter position is already filled, now we just need something to be pregnant, the less resources it takes and the less strength it has during hormonal outbursts, the better.

[Anonymous No.15514010]

7 year old boy is smarter than an adult woman

[Anonymous No.15514109]

>>15513694
>female only quotas

[Anonymous No.15514135]

>>15513694
with diversity quotas and the other numerous privileges they give to women, I'd be shocked if they didn't surpass men. I like how you said graduating more is what makes women better instead of higher scores or something, I guess men are still better there lol

[Anonymous No.15514152]

>>15514010
Huh. I was always average or just below, and I noticed at about age 7 that I was smarter than every woman I had ever met or heard of, and never found a counterexample. Thanks for the data points.

[Anonymous No.15514160]

If men are so smart, why are they more prone to violent crime?

[Anonymous No.15514162]

>>15514160
Now include abortions

[Anonymous No.15514166]

>>15514160
>forgetting the IQ distribution for men results in higher numbers of subhumans

[Anonymous No.15514167]

>>15514160
>if men are so smart, why do they do everything good and bad and smart and dumb in the world?
women lack agency. they don't do anything, they just "are".

[Anonymous No.15514220]

>>15514160
women are incapable

[Anonymous No.15514221]

>>15514160
>why are they more prone to violent crime?

Because evolutionary speaking they were the ones who fought and killed the animals so women and children could feed. They were also the one's who fought and killed each other in protection or raiding of villages, towns, cities and nations. You're not going to completely reverse multiple hundreds of thousands of years in evolution with only 2,000 - 4,000 years of civilization.

That being said the prevalence of violent
crime at this point in the modern era is mostly because the system allows it. If countries can spend trillions on fighting foreigners half a world away. Spend hundreds of billions sending spacecraft, satellites, autonomous rovers and people into space. Or spend tens of billions probing the smallest forms of reality at the quantum scale. They can spend that money on making men less violent or use that behavior in a more productive manner.

They just choose not to do so because they want you to believe human psychology is harder than being a global military super power, exploring space or understanding quantum mechanics.

Also they make money sending and holding people in jail.

[Anonymous No.15514231]

>>15514160
because women are weaker than men. If they weren't soo weak, they'd commit more crimes.

[Anonymous No.15514264]

>>15514166
>IQ distribution for men results in higher numbers of subhumans
Proof? You just said this with no argument to support it? violent crime =/= low iq. Famous Serial killers had high IQ.

[Anonymous No.15514286]

>>15514264
>Famous Serial killers
Word choice and needless restriction. It takes one victim to make a murder. Low IQ equals low impulse control. Low impulse control = higher chance to rely on emotional stimulus. Couple with men having higher testosterone meaning higher focus on status seeking actions and strength being an evolutionary necessity comes to low iq men being at a higher chances of committing violent acts. Sociopaths and psychopaths being instead lacking or not caring for soical ques.

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15514312]

>>15513573
smaller =/= dumber
in fact, most of the smartest people in the world are women. the only disadvantage they have is being naturally physically weaker, which can be fixed with a little bit of workout.
many current scientists and programmers are women, actually.
a brain having "more in it" doesn't mean it's more intelligent. a bigger room doesn't always have more people in it. you could fit 7 people in a large closet, and give two people a bedroom to stay in. the bedroom is bigger, but only has 2/7 as many people.
also, most people who go to college, and most people who graduate college, are women.
i suggest you kill yourself, so we have less discriminatory pieces of shit in the world. everyone will be happier with you gone. please do it. you have so little to live for. your life means a lot, but all that meaning is negative. please fucking die. i will cross my fingers tonight that when i wake up, you'll be dead.

fucking bitch.

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15514315]

>>15513573
ok fuck so it's been like 1 minute but i'm really sorry for telling you to kill yourself that could actually push you over the edge and have you actually die and i don't want to be responsible for anyone's death because i would never forgive myself and it's just fucking horrible so please keep yourself alive
you may be a terrible person right now but you can turn your life around please do it please make yourself a better person

[Anonymous No.15514325]

>>15513573
Most women have managed to breed. Most men have not. Maybe that extra ~10 % is a handicap.

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15514328]

>>15513639
what the fuck are you on about you sound like a fucking redneck
>>15513672
is this satire
>>15513713
you watch too much porn, that rarely happens in real life.
>>15513830
no, they stated a fact. numbers don't lie.
>>15513876
no, they were just proving the point about gay people being stupid wrong.

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15514331]

>>15514010
that graph is entirely fabricated. either you found this meme on /pol/, or you made it yourself after seeking out the graph that supports your side of the argument more, or making the graph yourself. here's a more accurate graph.

[Anonymous No.15514336]

>>15514331
>IQ = SAT score

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15514339]

>>15514336
if someone is smarter, they're more likely to score higher on a test. this is common knowledge. why are you so stupid? i swear, someone's going to accuse me of faking a stupid response to make myself look good.

[Anonymous No.15514342]

>>15514331
I don't know how SAT levels are graded, but doesn't that show that males are a little bit smarter on average?

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15514352]

>>15514342
thank you for not being a fucking retard. i wouldn't have been able to describe perfectly what i thought they did, without doing it myself. i, too, seeked out a fake graph to see if anyone noticed, and you did. i was planning to have everyone not notice it, and then i would come back with some snarky remark about them not being able to read graphs, and using that as evidence for sexists being dumber on average, but you kinda fucked that plan up. you're fine, though. i'm glad you noticed :)

[Anonymous No.15514355]

>>15514339
>IQ equal pass tests
Even the actually criticism for that chart don't support you. My God.

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15514362]

>>15514342
for reference, here's a more accurate graph, one which will line up more with most other graphs if you search for one online.

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15514364]

>>15514355
take your time, you'll be able to come up with a sensible response soon.

[Anonymous No.15514370]

>>15514364
>please play along. I act retarded so you waste time.
Go roleplay somewhere else.

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15514382]

>>15514370
huh??? i'm not acting retarded, i'm not trying to waste anyone's time, and i'm definitely not roleplaying. where the fuck did you read anything implying that?

[Anonymous No.15514443]

>>15514312
I thought this was excellent bait at first but it actually seems like you're serious.

>most of the smartest people in the world are women
At least fall back on a null hypothesis of 50/50. Empirically, as of now, for whatever reasons, men are usually more common in high-intelliigence vocations. Those reasons could be social or cultural but saying most of the smartest people in the world are women doesn't make any sense. Maybe men have a lower average but higher variance than women which would lead to the top of each field being dominated by men even with a lower average but that's not what you said either.

>a brain having "more in it" doesn't mean it's more intelligent
True, it's hard to correlate specific brain attributes or structures with intelligence. But the argument you are making is that males have less dense brains which I have seen no evidence of. I do remember some study saying that women have thicker neocortices but I still think this is pretty flimsy evidence for proof of intelligence either way.

>most people who go to college, and most people who graduate college, are women.
I frankly don't put any stock in this at all. There are innumerable cultural and temperamental reasons why this would be the case and graduating college is more of a very long process of checking boxes than a demonstration of intelligence. It would be more enlightening to see what topics each gender is studying (capable students are usually funneled into STEM due to social/govt influence) and also which gender was doing the most real innovation in what field (e.g. not people making up random models and post-hoc finding evidence for them in soft science).

Regardless I think these are all extremely fuzzy metrics for a quality that is already impossible to define. However it is really quite difficult to deny that almost all the innovators, scientists, and other historical "high-IQ" people have been men, for whatever reason.

[Anonymous No.15514545]

>>15514443
>However it is really quite difficult to deny that almost all the innovators, scientists, and other historical "high-IQ" people have been men, for whatever reason.
and men also have a bigger brain... put two n two together and it sort of implies one sex is more intelligent.

It makes intuitive sense a bigger brain will be smarter than a smaller brain. More brain = More neurons = More computations

[Anonymous No.15514547]

>>15513852
All my gf ever reads is romance novels or feel good motivational books. Hardly quality literature. Plus she's completely ruled by her emotions and if it's her menstrual week she's insufferable.

[Anonymous No.15514562]

>>15514315
You have to realize no one's born hating women. There are good reasons for hate.

[Anonymous No.15514645]

>>15514547
What do you read?

[Anonymous No.15514690]

>>15514160
Wow what a racist chart

[Anonymous No.15514693]

>>15513573
It's not enough to hate women you have to hurt them with power tools and caustic chemicals.

[Anonymous No.15514701]

>>15514645
Last thing I read was Down the Rabbit Hole that chronicles the disappearance of Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan. That was last month. I'm currently reading this fuckin Lua book while I'm learning it.

[Anonymous No.15514708]

>>15513573
Women can in fact be generally stupider than men. But how we measure intelligence actually just moves the goalpost to only be achievable by a certain type of person, which doesn't necessarily mean that other people can't develop intelligence in their own environment.

We think women are irrational (and most are, like men) because feminism forces them to go and play things that were made for men's anatomy and that level of testosterone. Then they don't succeed, shocker. But then succeed in good grades at school where you have to be calm and sit down and be submissive. Not fucking shocking again. It's hard to measure smarts without an actual universal test, right now these tests are only targeting very specific things.

[Anonymous No.15514712]

>>15514162
You mean the ones male doctors perform? Ok.

[Anonymous No.15514715]

>>15513573
Whales have even bigger brains. But you're somewhat right I'm sure that any whale is smarter than you.

[Anonymous No.15514717]

>>15513877
Yes, that's just what the majority of women read.

[Anonymous No.15514726]

>>15513636
> their value is something they have no real control over and it degrades with time. This causes neuroticism
It doesn't. You're neurotic or you're not. That's it.

[Anonymous No.15514764]

>>15514715
whales have a different kind of brain because it's literally another species. Because men and women are the same species, men's bigger brains will be smarter than women's smaller ones because it's of the same kind.

[Anonymous No.15514768]

>>15514764
>bigger = smarter
>?
even if the bigger brain is smoother?

[Anonymous No.15514843]

>>15513573
>>15513627
>>15513639
>>15513713
>>15513723
You guys are getting it pretty wrong I think. I think it's similar but different to how >>15513636 describes it
Duo to the intrinsic value females have, they evolutionary vise had less pressure to stick out since they were always going to breed ( no downside for a male in fertilizing multiple females) this leads females to be less competitive and have less strife to perform greatly since being competitive can also give you enemies and there is no need for them to take that risk. (girls are more likely to shit talk behind your back since they are prone to avoid direct confrontations)
BUT being smarter also always had evolutionary advantages for females ( keeping groups together, finding the right mate or being good at crafting things for the tribe to name a few). It's not that they are stupid it's that their brains have different goals, often more social ones and that they often lack the competitive spirit.
That being said it's important to note that this will always just be a rule for the average female population as a whole.
I've met many woman in labs that completely abandoned the idea of having kids and instead solely focused on researching. Needless to say these woman performed just as well as men since in theory females have the potential to to achieve the same things as us, it's just that they usually chose not to
>>15513909
Thats just plain wrong, a smarter female would definitely have an evolutionary advantage to a stupid one in a tribe, the slightly higher consumption of calories is not nearly enough to offset that advantage

[Anonymous No.15514886]

>>15514843
as a woman, this is pretty fair
plus, it is a bit stupid to say that a person's value only exists by "traditional male role" standards. If you have a shit mom you don't really produce children that are prepared to grow into their full potential.

I just can't blame anyone for choosing family over career especially if you're working for someone else if you have the drive to reproduce and raise children. The idea seems pretty cucked. People should do what makes them happy. If a woman/man wants to have kids, I don't see why they shouldn't, just for the sake of "proving to society they're so smart".

I'm not even talking about giving up work, because most people have kids and work. It's just likely you won't do overtime and "give to the company" as much as someone without anyone dependent on them.

[Anonymous No.15514895]

>>15514886
>as a woman, this is pretty fair
Fair but not truth... cope
>Every great scientist to date has been male
>men on average have bigger brains
>^ implies men are smarter

[Anonymous No.15514911]

>>15513573
Small brain =/= less powerful
Even if...
>>15514160
>just gender and not "tribe"

[Anonymous No.15514948]

>>15514895
yes, women are weaker, dumber, more evil, cheat more, less competent, and are more capable of everything bad.

[Anonymous No.15515087]

>>15514843
Don't be dumb. Go study the basics of evolution again. Just because something is advantageous doesn't mean it will be selected for. You need to have evolutionary pressure, which there was none on females because men protected them and fed them. Females being inferior mentally and physically isn't detrimental, they still fulfill their (evolutionary) role perfectly fine.
This is like 5th grade science... you should know this assuming you're not underage b&...

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15515119]

>>15514895
>>"Every great scientist to date has been male"
literally just look up "famous female scientists" and you'll see that you're retarded

[Anonymous No.15515127]

>>15515119
>anon proves femanon is retarded, thereby demolishing his own argument
pottery

[Anonymous No.15515130]

>>15515119
no women makes the top 10 geniuses in any field

[Anonymous No.15515163]

>>15513639
define "inferior"

[Anonymous No.15515171]

>>15513877
they are too dumb to understand that

[Anonymous No.15515193]

>>15514545
>It makes intuitive sense a bigger brain will be smarter than a smaller brain. More brain = More neurons = More computations
Then why a sperm whale's brain is bigger than us, is it that they are more intellegent in some way

[Anonymous No.15515208]

>>15515171
Then what if I make a scfi romance? That's soft enough to understand yet still important for the romance.

[Anonymous No.15515251]

>>15515087
>This is like 5th grade science... you should know this assuming you're not underage b&...

im a biology grad student actually hence why im kinda invested into the topic

>Just because something is advantageous doesn't mean it will be selected for. You need to have evolutionary pressure which there was none on females

there is evolutionary pressure on females aswell, otherwise they wouldnt have evolved at all

the pressure is just a different one, but it still also selects for intelligence, i can guarantee you that females today are much smarter then the ones 100.000 years ago

I get it. you dont like woman and thats okay im sure you have your reasons, but this is the science board not /pol/.

the stuff you are writting is just really fucking stupid and yet you have the audacity to call me dumb and tell me to study more evolution even tho my understanding of evolution far exceeds yours
please just go back to /pol/ or /b/ or start thinking before you post

[Anonymous No.15515252]

>>15513573
The extra 10% only controls the dick

[Anonymous No.15515283]

>>15513573
Schopenchad has a bunch of quotes like this

There's also one about lying and manipulation being the only defense they have

[Anonymous No.15515631]

>>15515193
How many times am I gonna see the same dumb argument again n again? A whale has a different kind of brain, it's another species. men n women are the same species.

[Anonymous No.15515657]

>>15515193
A whale has a different kind of brain, it's another species. men n women are the same species, which is why a bigger brain would be better, I guessed the premise would be obvious.

[Anonymous No.15515704]

>>15513877
My woman reads mostly fantasy and horror with some sci-fi thrown in.

[Anonymous No.15515880]

>>15515251
Wow looks like I struck a nerve and you're literally a zoomzoom. That's hilarious, I fucking called it. I love when retards like you try to twist words to avoid my point. Let me restate it for your brainlet ass: There was no need for BOTH the male and the female to play the protector/hunter role. This is what caused the deviation in intelligence and strength, which still persists today even if your feminist courses are telling you otherwise. The data doesn't lie, and as someone studying biology (you must suck ass at it by the way) you should see similar patterns in most mammals too, but I guess you're a bit too retarded for that. So if the evolutionary pressure on a male is to be a good hunter/protector, and that same evolutionary pressure is not on a female (the pressure would more likely be capacity to find a strong intelligent male), then OBVIOUSLY we'll see the divergence we did. That's what I meant when I said 'theres no evolutionary pressure on women', obviously there is, but it's not for the protector/hunter role, or at least it wasn't for the vast majority of human history, you fucking dimwit.
I can't believe I had to spell it out for you, you stupid zoomer. Thank you for wasting my time by ignoring my points and responding with zero refutation. Faggot.

[Anonymous No.15515927]

>>15515880
you were quoted and the counter points directly responded to the quotes, your points weren't avoided
>That's what I meant when I said 'theres no evolutionary pressure on women',

you said something stupid and got called out for it. how are we supposed to know you meant something completely different

Ive had too many internet debates to try and understand your lines of thoughts there

i gave you good counterpoints to your shitty takes and you responded with even more stupid schizo rambling
this will never end no matter what I type so yes now i will just ignore your "points"

I really do hate your kind

[Anonymous No.15515963]

>>15515927
You're wasting my time but let me get things straight. When I say you twisted my words, I wasn't lashing out, you insufferable faggot. You literally intentionally omitted the important half of my sentence when quoting me, "which there was none on females because men protected and fed them." I know you're not debating in good faith because you intentionally omitted that. That part specifically implies that the roles of men and women have historically been different, that one protects and hunts, and the other rears children. I have literally made this point in every single one of my posts. Here are the facts:
There is a clear and measurable difference in the strength of women and men, and the IQ of women and men.
There is a clear and measurable difference in the strength of females and males in most mammals. (This is a big hint you little autistic screeching retard)
The first thing you did before raising any points, and I know this because it's right there above this post, is ramble about how your a biology student, then ramble about how I go to /pol/ (completely irrelevant so I'm losing by even addressing this, but I don't go to /pol/, you only succeeded in proving how you need baseless accusations and appeal to ethos to handle the content of my posts), about how I have 'audacity' to call you underage (you're still in university buddy, settle down), then returning to rambling about /pol/ and /b/.
You are a frail retard, probably having a hard time in whatever shitty university you're at, so I get that you like to come to /sci/ to try and feel good about debating people, but the only point you've made is 'it also selects for intelligence'. Maybe it does, but clearly not as much as men, because there wouldn't be a divergence if it did.
Finally, you conveniently left out any mention of difference in strength, which is HALF of my fucking point from my FIRST post. You fucking ape. Go debate in bad faith with somewhere else, try plebbit.

[Anonymous No.15516031]

>>15515963
I hate myself why cant i just ignore you

>You literally intentionally omitted the important half of my sentence when quoting me, "which there was none on females because men protected and fed them."
You said "none" Thats literally all im debating

you said there was no evolutionary advantage to females being smarter because there was no evolutionary pressure "none on females"

That is a wrong statement no matter how you twist things. All this other stuff you are saying is just stuff you are adding because of your agenda against woman
i dont give shit about your agenda I never made a claim about any iq studies or strength studies or any other shit like that you fucking schizo fuck fuck fuck

all this shit you are spouting doesnt make your stupid first claim which im debating anymore right, hence why im not even reacting to it.

its like my nephew whos really into dinosaurs trying to convince me that a velociraptor is bigger then an elepanth
"but uncle a velociraptor could kill an elephant"
"but uncle a velociraptor is faster then an elephant"

yes timmy but an elephant is still bigger

"but uncle a velociraptor has more teeth"

i feel like im talking to a toddler

you said there was no evolutionary pressure on females
that is fucking wrong
this statement doesnt make it right
>which there was none on females because men protected them and fed them

and neither does this

>Females being inferior mentally and physically isn't detrimental, they still fulfill their (evolutionary) role perfectly fine.
why cant you stupid fucking assholes never admit when you are wrong
im wrong all the fucking time, i double check everything i say and whenever im proven wrong i admit it
but you dont need to do that do you?
so stay fucking stupid

you win, the schizo retard wins
im seething at your retarded shit and am genuinely angry
congrats

[Anonymous No.15516068]

>>15513657
Stop saying big words. Its metaphysical because they have social power, yes the social power comes indirectly from their physical attributes but men like those because of abstract notions of sexiness.

Semantics aside it is the most helpful to conversations to call it social power, which is metaphysical.

[Anonymous No.15516072]

>>15516031
>im wrong all the fucking time
You sure are lol

[Anonymous No.15516078]

>>15516072
we all are
most of us just choose to stay wrong

[Anonymous No.15516083]

>>15513573
>why are women so fucking inferior?
The only difference is hormones, so this. >>15513639

[Anonymous No.15516088]

>>15515119
>>>"Every great scientist to date has been male"
>literally just look up "famous female scientists" and you'll see that you're retarded
Sure is a short list and their "accomplishments" are mostly nothing.

Marie Currie is at the top of the list, and all she did was play around with radioactive shit and died from it due to lack of knowledge of how harmful it was.

[Anonymous No.15516090]

>>15516088
Her husband Pierre was a brilliant experimentalist and it's bizarre that nobody gives him credit since they did all their work together. Sadly he was killed by a reckless driver (run over by a horse drawn carriage) in 1906.

[Anonymous No.15516094]

>>15516090
Good point to bring up anon. His accomplishments being overlooked is due to toxic-femininity and female-priviledge that permeates society.

[Anonymous No.15516102]

>>15513573
True and real. Women brain peaks at 10, after that it shrinks. At 18 they are as smart as any 8yo girl.

[Anonymous No.15516106]

>>15516102
So you got to catch them between 10-18?
Peak Female.

[Anonymous No.15516107]

>>15515119
LMAO.

[Anonymous No.15516110]

>>15516031
>why cant i just ignore you
Because you're a dumb narcissist in need of supply. Please please please stop shitting up the board with more pseudointellectual garbage.

[Anonymous No.15516113]

>>15514312
> i suggest you kill yourself,
Typical woman, therefore 8yo brain.

[Anonymous No.15516116]

>>15514312
You Will Never Be A Woman.
How does it feel to be inferior like a woman, but not even considered attractive and physically desirable either?

[Anonymous No.15516117]

>>15515283
True and real, the simping is strong in white males.

[Anonymous No.15516126]

>>15513627
You minmax to deal with infants, who are mentally and physically inferior regardless.

That and you force the other half of the species to get dopamine hits from so much as looking at anything with a vaguely female shape.

[Anonymous No.15516155]

>>15516031
this is such a women response lmao

[Anonymous No.15516164]

>>15516068
it's not metaphysical because it comes about due to physical traits of women...when men give them advantages it's because they feel the biological urge to do so

[Anonymous No.15516310]

>>15516102
So men are pedophiles by nature.

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15516557]

>>15516113
i'm a guy.

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15516558]

>>15516155
well if 1 person is women that means they're at least twice as smart as a woman LOL

[Anonymous No.15516560]

>>15513573
Elephant brains are bigger than your moms ass but elephants dont fly rockets to moon.

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15516563]

>>15516116
i never said i wanted to be a woman. i'm a cis male. also, a few people consider me attractive, but they're the annoying popular girls, while all the girls i like are nerds, and we're both always too socially awkward to start a conversation with each other. i actually got really close to having a girlfriend, but the school year ended, and i switched schools, and haven't seen her since.

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15516565]

>>15516560
i like this reply, but how does an ass fly a rocket to a moon? like, with farts??????

[Anonymous No.15516593]

>>15513573
Intelligence is not given by brain size alone.
>>15514768
Intelligence is not given by gyrification alone.

What determines intelligence? A variety of factors including especially neocortical neuron count, connectivity, brain size, gyrification, cortical thickness, neuron density ect. Also remember that the brain is dynamic and the positions of neurons changing over time change the way we think and function.

There are a variety of brain regions as well that, when accounted for body size, are sexually dimorphic. Does a bigger Pre-Frontal Lobe in women when they are better at problem solving or decision making? Does a bigger Inferior Parietal Lobe in males contribute to a greater mathematical ability? My answer to these questions is probably not, given each of the differences in one Lobe may be "cancelled" by the differences in another area. For example while males may have a bigger IPL and Angular Gyrus females have a larger Inferior Frontal Gyrus which is also implicated in arithmetic, Where females may have a bigger PFC when accounted for body size, males have better connectivity between the FL and the PL. What this says to me is that in comparison with the opposite sex the other is likely to have a a trait that "cancels" the others trait advantage, whether that is an increased surface area and gyrification in females to cancel out a bigger male brain or any other sort of "cancelling".

I find a more interesting question to be "why do more males have autism than females" due to the greater variance in male intelligence scores (poor performance and great performance), as we know many of the symptoms of autism have effects on intelligence. (duh its neurological)

[Anonymous No.15516601]

>>15516563
why do you namefag on 4channel? why not just go back to discord

[tygical !!/L+upXixjjH No.15516604]

>>15516601
why do you bash people for things that don't affect you?

[Anonymous No.15516660]

>>15513573
I hate women (love from Kazakhstan!) but I must remind you that birds also have small brains, yet they are very smart.
Having smaller brain is no conclusive evidence to claim women are dumb.
If you wanna prove that women are dumb, just hang around women and listen to the retarded shit they have to say. That's all the proof I need.

[Anonymous No.15516662]

>>15513694
>higher college graduates
>still earn less money than men

[Anonymous No.15516748]

>>15513573
Well they are smaller in general, so of course they're going to have smaller body parts lol

[Anonymous No.15516774]

>>15513573
The female is not designed to solve problems but to cause problems

[Anonymous No.15516777]

>>15516774
Aw... How can you say that, anon, they are so adorable

[Anonymous No.15516835]

>>15513639
t. someone who considers themselves 'high t' because they get morning wood.

[Anonymous No.15517090]

>>15516660
birds within the same species that have larger brains are on average smarter, my incredible and amazing thesis

[Anonymous No.15517145]

>>15513627
By cucking my husband

[Anonymous No.15517155]

>>15513694
Trades are 99% men and don't require a college degree which skews the college ratio.

You should look at the stats on college degrees where you need to do more than just show up to lectures. Mostly men.

[Anonymous No.15517783]

>>15513656
>Alan Turing?
He wasn't smart though. He got caught and got castrated.

[Anonymous No.15517939]

>>15514162
good one
>>15514712
even better

its nice seeing a back and forth like this

[Anonymous No.15517954]

>>15514221
>>15514160
unpopular opinion: violence and murder is underrated
the whole of society nowadays is all about being a meek, obedient "non-violent" citizen. The second you actually start looking for better methods for what you want you're labelled as a "terrorist" or smth along those lines.
I'm not saying violence and murder is cool, plenty of that is retarded shit resulting from lack of control. But it IS underrated.
underrated=/=cool and based

[Anonymous No.15517961]

>>15514160
they just have the power to do it. If women were as strong as men their conflicts would also end up bloody.
Most murder victims are males too, so its kinda like niggers killing niggers, except its all males killing other males.

[Anonymous No.15517970]

>>15516310
yes, that should've been obvious. Whenever societal restrictions go away men go the cunny route. This is at least part of the reason why the most powerful people on the planet are pedos.

[Anonymous No.15517974]

>all those graphs
>barely any sources
c'mon /sci/, you can do better

[Anonymous No.15517978]

why are some men cowards? quality women are meant to be loyal/empathetic.

never trust a man that's afraid of a jell cell.

keep it real you bitch niggas

[Anonymous No.15517982]

>>15514160
men were much more impulsive 100 of years ago because they had to protect the tribe etc.


it's still scorpion and the frog on the streets

[Anonymous No.15518010]

>>15517970
So all the people who want to return to monkey are just child fuckers in disguise. Are guys who fuck milfs and cougars a genetic fuck up?

[Anonymous No.15518024]

>>15514712
Female doctors perform abortions too

[Anonymous No.15518027]

>>15517145
Then enjoy getting raped and murdered for betraying your husband :)

[Anonymous No.15518035]

>>15518010
>Are guys who fuck milfs and cougars a genetic fuck up?
depends on a lot of surrounding context. Do they fuck them for fun/hedonism? Are they self aware of what they actually want?

[Anonymous No.15518039]

>>15516310

[Anonymous No.15518044]

>>15518039
>9

[Anonymous No.15519085]

>>15514312
Hot

[Anonymous No.15519101]

>>15516088
Marie SKŁADOWSKA-curie was a great scientist, who did many smart things.

[Anonymous No.15519201]

>>15513573
>>but anon brain size =/= IQ
Why do you imply that there is something wrong with this statement? Do you think a whale is smarter than you? Women's body to brain mass ratio is probably the same if not better than ours. You're correct in that men's IQ has a wider range and that there are more male extreme outliers, but why do you think this means anything about your intelligence? You're a low IQ wagecuck at mcdonald's so stop claiming other men's achievements as your own

[Anonymous No.15519210]

>>15516031
it's okay anon
i got your point and it's a reasonable take
/sci/ just succumbed to /pol/tards swamping it during covid and it hasn't recovered since so the iq is at an all time low while the usual cuck screeching about women is at an all tiem high

[Anonymous No.15519937]

>>15519201
Women’s brains are 10 percent smaller even when corrected for their shorter average stature
Even Proportionally they have smaller brains than men

[Anonymous No.15520002]

>>15516068

No, the central point is that we're describing something which is straightforward to understand in physical terms and doesn't really have anything "mystical" or "mysterious" about it. That is why your insistence on "metaphysical" as a descriptor is very poor.

Oooga booga Jane is smaller and has smooth skin, make Grug pp hard. Grug provide for Jane, paint on walls, tell joke. Grug create. Jane coast through life as mediocrity. We all know the story. Physical.

>>15516164

Good man.

[Anonymous No.15520038]

>>15513573
brain size =/= with intelligence but interestingly it does absolutely correlate with empathy and altruistic behaviour in all species (relative to the same species)

[Anonymous No.15520066]

>>15513639
Gays are on average more successful than straight men because historically a lot of them worked harder in school and their career ao that they could leave their small hillbilly homophobic towns

[Anonymous No.15520118]

>>15519937
Sure. The question is - and? Does it make you feel better about your shitwage, low IQ job or something?

[Anonymous No.15520191]

>>15513573
The human brain is so advanced these differences are minute.
Handling complex information is a nurture problem.
You'll be dumb if you never open a book, no matter how quickly your brain processes information and someone slow can outperform simply by perservering and putting in more effort.

I knew kids who learned slower than me but weren't nearly as lazy when I was in school - of course they outperformed me until I got my shit together

[Anonymous No.15520714]

>>15520118
I love how someone states a matter of fact and you immediately project your own hatred and anger onto them

[Anonymous No.15520718]

>>15520714
It's a science board, not a board for /pol/tard newfags like you to say random low IQ matter of facts

[Anonymous No.15520757]

>>15520191
All the evidence points to these differences arising during the character creation phase. There is no respec button one can nurture. You should refrain from bullying and gaslighting those worse than you, since you're not a morally better person for being physiologically superior.

[Anonymous No.15520783]

>>15520066

You are making a deeply flawed claim which is easily refuted from multiple angles, although your idea could also be validated in other ways. The central question is what is valued, what people care about.

-The thing about gays being "more successful", whatever that means, initially suggests only one valuation: socioeconomic status, but here you seem to be focused on high-performing, high-earning gay men, ignoring the low-status (gay) men that no one ever wants to think about but who comprise the majority of the cohort. For every one who moves to the city and gets some high-powered job, there's another three schlubs who live quietly in the periphery.

-The above focus on "muh job" (because gays have nothing else to do with themselves apart from sex and work) also ignores the other two more obvious values: procreation and acceptance in community. Recent years make it seem otherwise, but gay men are manifestly at a disadvantage in these other two categories, even if they carve out their own little ghettoes. The major advantage of homosexuality during middle age is that its sufferers may be free of the responsibility of child rearing in order to pursue artistic expression (by which you get remembered, something worth valuing), but at the expense of evolution, for what that's worth. The various competing values I am suggesting are money, family, sexuality both recreational and romantic, work, and religion. Major departments of life. Certain gays may be better positioned to work up money and pursue work itself and recreational sex, but they are at an obvious disadvantage where family and religion are concerned, and these latter categories are especially important to deep happiness. And I say this as an atheist, it's just a sociological reality.

In your latter clause, you seem only to have in mind your cherry-picked high-performers who got the hell out. But you don't even have to be very bright or wealthy to leave for the city. The trick is staying.

[Anonymous No.15520796]

These 2 have brains bigger than all of us here. They must be super intelligent.

[Anonymous No.15520821]

>>15520718
>continues to project

[Anonymous No.15520822]

>>15520118
on average those women are doing jobs they are less competent at than the median male, who loses the position because employers prefers to hire women for diversity benefits

[Anonymous No.15520826]

>>15520796
how about when you control for class and education? :)

[Anonymous No.15520869]

>>15520796
The big show and the great kali are smart tho

[Anonymous No.15520888]

>>15520796
professional wrestlers are all extremely intelligent, they earn more money that scientists and they have more fun on the job, spoofing modern soiciety and laughing in its face while getting paid big bux to do so. plus women are attracted to them and they keep themselves in top physical condition as part of their profession.
pic related, a 70 year old man who will never look like a scientist.

[Anonymous No.15520903]

>>15520888

[Anonymous No.15521036]

>>15520796
You probably think high school jocks are all retarded and life is some RPG where stats are rolled evenly when it's not.

[Anonymous No.15521227]

>>15514362
Grades don't really show intelligence. They are mostly only showing of how focused someone is.
I was in 99th percentile in my country in middle school just by listening to the classes, and fell down to 90th for sleeping in class all the time in high school, only thanks to my solid core knowledge. Men are on average less focused and more active, resulting in many not being able to listen in class. Meanwhile all the girls just take notes, listen in unadulterated focus.
I haven't yet seen any study that takes into account this fact, please do post if you come across one.

[Anonymous No.15521885]

>>15520821
>project
Project what? Does your programming just fall back on pretrained buzzwords the moment your faggot ass gets slightly challenged?

>>15520822
So maybe look at the greasy ruling class of boomers that make those hiring decisions?

[Anonymous No.15522254]

>>15521885
>projecting his NPC actions onto others

[Anonymous No.15522281]

>>15522254
you /pol/tards will do anything to deflect and avoid an argument jesus christ

[Anonymous No.15522286]

>>15517954
absolutely. who ever said "violence never solves anything" was probably bleeding out their assholes from being fucked over so many times and never doing anything about it. Also think about Karma and how that shit works in other ways e.g. if you are a doormat and don't settle scores your neglecting your 'karmic duty'.

[Anonymous No.15522293]

>>15513573
You have never even fucked a woman

[Anonymous No.15522305]

>>15517954
>violence and murder is underrated
It's literally deified. It's at all-time high popularity. Just take a look at last century. What you're confusing is state and non-state violence.

[Anonymous No.15522331]

>>15522281
>that entire post

[Anonymous No.15522724]

>>15516563
You are one of the biggest bitches I ever saw.

[Anonymous No.15522731]

>>15513694
>social science

[Anonymous No.15522807]

>>15513656
That is just gay propaganda, the guy was mediocre at best. It was put on the foreground as an assassination target, a low value dummy.

[Anonymous No.15522820]

>>15514362
Only the ones at the top matter, the rest are just irrelevant NPCs.

[Anonymous No.15522849]

>>15518010
Return to monke, not monkey. Monke is short of Mon-keigh from WH40k. The meaning of the meme is being able to subdue another who believed itself superior, and such deed is done by rejecting all falsehoods and irrelevant parafernalia created by a decadent culture.

[Anonymous No.15522856]

>>15518039
True and real, that is why the consent age must be lowered to 8, and all feminist executed.

[Anonymous No.15523210]

>>15517155
>Trades are 99% men
And just wait till women start getting in. Then it'll be 20% men.