/lit/ - Literature

pastebin please
i dont like clicking on sjw sites

>>7250039
>https://tenureshewrote.wordpress.com/2013/09/26/dont-be-that-dude-handy-tips-for-the-male-academic/

I know why this was posted, but I think it it's reasonable enough.

Women in academia are incredibly insecure. It's pretty easy to get laid. I remember going to this conference on the Tel Quel and fucking another phd student.

>>7250068
If you think a woman would have to be insecure to fuck you that's pretty sad. Might still be true of course.

>>7250075
They're insecure about their intellect bro. Take advantage of it

>>7250080
>Take advantage of it
Or you could, you know, be attractive.

>>7250075
Not him, but in my experience as an insecure man-whore in college I really think most people, male and female, who have a lot of casual sex do it for ego validation more than any other reason. I pretty much totally replaced casual sex with my art when I reached an arbitrary line where I decided the art was good.

>>7250039
not going to read it
but is it basically tips on how men can make women's lives comfier?
why do women keep on advising us how to make their lives better?
is some beta faggot asking them?
i sure as shit don't give a fuck
i have troubles of my own

>>7250092
Obviously that's a contributing factor. But you have to be intelligent and attractive to take advantage of their insecurity. Unfortunately, for you, you will be unable to achieve this.

why did you bring us an image that isn't the article text? i'm thinking clickbait.

>>7250100
>but is it basically tips on how men can make women's lives comfier

A lot of them are more about not being a problem than actively helping.

So they complain that they are considered separate, and yet they do everything to separate themselves.

>Don’t comment on a woman’s appearance in a professional context.
>Don’t talk over your female colleagues.
I wouldn't do either of these to anyone, female or male. I'm not an animal who needs telling how to act towards people.

>Don’t refuse to go through doors opened by women
Who does this?

Articles like this don't help anyone.

>>7250100

Why you should not open Doors for Women the Blogpost.

the one thing you always see in feminist writing like this is men are always telling women to "smile." is this true? it seems incredibly odd.

>>7250039

>dont refer to us as mrs. or ms. call us dr. or prof.

No, Mrs. or Ms. is a valid formal address that displays respect when used.

>>7250124
>I wouldn't do either of these to anyone, female or male.
Everyone's not like you, unfortunately.
>>Don’t refuse to go through doors opened by women
Wow, I missed that one. That's stupid as all fuck. Must either be fictional or like the most fedora parts of /r/mensrights.

>>7250121
>A lot of them are more about not being a problem than actively helping.
but will not being a problem inconvenience me in any way? or make me sacrifice something for people I don't care about even remotely?

>>7250133
>when you would otherwise say “Dr.” or “Prof
The point is to use Ms in the same situations as Mr.

>>7250145
Depends, do you think not talking over people is inconvenient?

>>7250150

What situations might that be? I address my Professors usually as Mr. if it is labeled in their syllabus to do such.

5. Make sure your department seminars, conference symposia, search committees, and panel discussions have a good gender balance. If you find that someone turns you down, ask them for recommendations for an alternative; don’t give up. Recognize that if there is a minority of women in your program or discipline, they may be disproportionately burdened with invitations to serve on committees or give talks. Be sensitive to this!

you sexist men don't realize how hard it is to be overvalued because of your gender :^)

>>7250160
>Depends, do you think not talking over people is inconvenient?
depends how stupid or irrelevant is what they're saying?

>>7250109
If you were either you wouldn't have to, though.

>>7250164
I'm not not a native speaker so I shouldn't tell people when to use what titles. The claim in the article was that Ms would often be used when a man would be called Dr or Prof, which I can't say if it's true or not, and the recommendation was to be consistent across the sexes.

>don't act to your benefit, but for the all humans are equal ideology

>>7250187
>The claim in the article was that Ms would often be used when a man would be called Dr or Prof, which I can't say if it's true or not,

I don't think anyone can. There is no grand registry of words that have been uttered. But following the tone of the rest of this article, it is quite clear that the author believes herself to be a victim. Which is sad.

>>7250190
"your benefit" is a top spook m8, as is the ego

>>7250167
>5. Make sure your department seminars, conference symposia, search committees, and panel discussions have a good gender balance. If you find that someone turns you down, ask them for recommendations for an alternative; don’t give up. Recognize that if there is a minority of women in your program or discipline, they may be disproportionately burdened with invitations to serve on committees or give talks. Be sensitive to this!

see, this is the bullshit I was talking about. "how to make women's lives easier tips for men"
fuck off with your tips. if you aint blood-related or we aren't fucking you, we don't give a fuck about making your life easier. sometimes even if you are blood related or we are fucking you we don't give a fuck about making your life easier. its easy enough for you. compete or starve. i'm glad i didn't bother reading this crap article

>>7250201
You could make a study based on emails to professors.

>>7250092
for men who aren't attractive literally the only way to get with attractive women is to use your intellect to enhance your perceived status and hope to find women insecure enough to want to prove their worth to you via sex.

how's about if instead of all this reactive morality, I use the hard work I've put in towards becoming a tenured professor to arrange whatever research opportunities or bar meetings I please.

>>7250209

You could, but that would just be a study of emails to professors, and does that really encompass the topic of addressing your professor as it exists as a concept? I do not think so. Trying to tame that abstract concept and bring it into such nonsense as an absolute statement is stupid. The author of this article cannot know if female professors are addressed any differently than male professors.

>>7250075
>>7250092
>>7250186
lots of projecting there. did he say they have to be insecure? if they are, they can be an easier lay.

>>7250216
So sleep with women at your level?

>>7250227
The last one wasn't me.

feminism is reactionary

>>7250228
women are able to use the higher sexual drive of men to sleep with men who are above their level of attractiveness, so why shouldn't men use their superior intellect to be able to do the same?

>>7250164
I always call my professors "professor"

>>7250203
>6. Pay attention to who organizes the celebrations, gift-giving, or holiday gatherings. Make sure that it’s not disproportionately women in your lab, department, or organization who are the party planners or social organizers. Volunteer to do it yourself, or suggest a man next time.
>7. Volunteer when someone asks for a note-taker, coffee-run gopher, or lunch order-taker at your next meeting. Don’t let this task fall to women, even if they tend to volunteer (we’re socially conditioned to do so). Make sure that women aren’t being asked to do this more than men.

If you're convinced that the envisioned everybody-is-equal utopia would benefit all and yourself, then you'll do it.
If you doubt that this theory would work out, then accepting workloads that peers simply don't have is deliberately fucking yourself.

>>7250241
>superior intellect
Using people's insecurities requires superior intellect?

>tfw your cucked male prof retweets this

>>7250201
In my wife's experience this is 100% true, as is having a male nurse walking next to her being called doctor.

>>7250252
increasing your status, in the case mentioned here in the academic world, in order to stimulate feelings of insecurity requires intellect. generally increasing one's status requires intellect.

>>7250272
Ehh, the kind of women that would fuck you because of your status are probably insufferably posh. Each to their own I suppose.

>>7250278
well, women will fuck you for two and only two reasons: your looks or your status. if you don't have looks you've only got the one option.

>>7250249
that article is bullshit, I'm not disputing that. But the ego is the biggest spook of all m8. All the wise men of the ages are pretty much united in saying that the ego is the first spook that you have to exorcize before you can know anything

>women trying to speak about men's issues
Time to face facts. Women will never understand the masculine mind, the masculine biology, or masculine behavior. Women trying to speak about men's behavior is as cringeworthy as men strongly advocating on the abortion issue.

>>7250294
Well my brother and I look very much a like and he has a qt gf. So either I'm attractive or I shouldn't take advice about women from 4chan. I wonder which.

>>7250270
>In my wife's experience this is 100% true, as is having a male nurse walking next to her being called doctor.

And why is this a problem? Men are overwhelmingly more competent than women in almost every single walk of life, but when women truly are exceptional, they usually get credit for it, i.e Marie Curie and similar historical women.

Stereotypes exist for a reason, because many of them are just plain true.

>>7250208
lmao women will never understand this

>>7250208
anon I think you just cracked the code

>Don’t let this task fall to women, even if they tend to volunteer (we’re socially conditioned to do so)

Should I fight her if she continues to insist on doing the coffee run? At what point do I just let her get the fucking coffee?

>>7250312
>men deserve getting credit even when they don't deserve it
God I hate this place. Have you ever considered that the whole "women will only fuck you for looks or status" might really be "only really shallow women are going to be interested people who think of women this way"?

>>7250047
http://pastebin.com/9F93t1WP

>Don’t talk over your female colleagues. There is a lot of social conditioning that goes into how men and women communicate differently. You may not realize that you’re doing it, but if you find yourself interrupting women, or speaking over them, stop.
lmao men do this to other men all the time. i talk over my coworkers if i think what they're saying is stupid or i can say it more succinctly and in a way that will be better understood by who we're talking to. they all do the same. the fact that women DON'T do this is why you end up with women raising their hand to ask a speaker a question and just rambling about whatever dumb shit comes into their head while the speaker just stares at them.

>Pay attention to who organizes the celebrations, gift-giving, or holiday gatherings. Make sure that it’s not disproportionately women in your lab, department, or organization who are the party planners or social organizers. Volunteer to do it yourself, or suggest a man next time.
men give way less of a fuck about this stuff. this is like saying it's sexist that men always have to organize the office football pool.

>Volunteer when someone asks for a note-taker, coffee-run gopher, or lunch order-taker at your next meeting. Don’t let this task fall to women, even if they tend to volunteer (we’re socially conditioned to do so). Make sure that women aren’t being asked to do this more than men.
this establishes you as the bitch of the group and is just an overall dumb move. nobody should volunteer for this

>Finally, if you do all of the above, don’t expect a cookie. Your efforts may go unacknowledged or even unrecognized much of the time. Keep at it anyway, because you’re not out to get special recognition. You’re doing it because it’s the decent thing to do.
lmao. "just be a beta faggot and waste your time making my life easier at your own expense, but don't expect me to acknowledge it"
hahahahaha

i'm beginning to believe that 90+% of women are fundamentally unable to understand competition and conflicting interests

>>7250294
You know lots of women find men more attractive when they find out that man finds them attractive. Courtship isn't just about displaying a requisite amount of your own physical attractiveness or status. A lot of it is the pursuit. The chaser likes the chased. But the chased may grow to find she likes the chaser in turn.

>>7250338
>deserve credit even when they don't deserve it

I was pretty clear in saying that men are more competent than women. That's not the same as saying someone should get praise where nothing is due.

>Have you ever considered that the whole "women will only fuck you for looks or status" might really be "only really shallow women are going to be interested people who think of women this way"?

That's probably true, unfortunately this means that the overwhelming majority of women are shallow.

>>7250350
Fuck the chase. And fuck your social conventions. No woman on this planet is worth going through emotional turmoil simply to stroke her childish ego.

>.wordpress.com
you guys know anybody can make a wordpress, right?
it's not the same as getting published

she is being very self-assured in this article, not taking an academic approach at all, not even demonstrating she is familiar with the counter-arguments to underrepresentation
just a very poor show accros the board and you gus are demonstrating your stupidity by taking it so seriously.
So you guys can fuck off, or maybe I should and save myself some sanity.

>>7250350
this is probably only true in more sexually conservative cultures. in sexually liberal cultures women are aware than at minimum 80% of the men they come across would fuck them if they could.

>>7250355
>That's probably true, unfortunately this means that the overwhelming majority of women are shallow.

I guess it depends on if we're talking casual sex or long term relationships. In the former case shallow features are presumably going to be what's important (it'd be weird otherwise) but in the latter I don't think the overwhelming majority of women will put up with a misogynist for status or looks.

>>7250349
>>Finally, if you do all of the above, don’t expect a cookie. Your efforts may go unacknowledged or even unrecognized much of the time. Keep at it anyway, because you’re not out to get special recognition. You’re doing it because it’s the decent thing to do.

Both the content and the tone of this article are repugnant

>>7250357
Well you can always sit around and wait for a woman to come after you. And I don't mean this in a glib way. My sister-in-law initiated the relationship with my brother and they are happily married.

However, I think you will find that the overwhelming majority of women will not be that forward. Probably for the same reason that a man wouldn't initiate, the fear of rejection.

By pursuing a woman you are interested in earnestly, you are assuaging that latent fear prophetically. Which contributes to them liking you.

>>7250372
>I guess it depends on if we're talking casual sex or long term relationships.

I don't really think it matters, to be honest. The man would have to have an obscene amount of status or money, for a woman to ignore his physical appearance.

>>7250357
>>7250350

I'll raise you one higher:
>No woman on this planet is worth going through
>Anything.

Ignore your lizard brain. You don't need arbitrary relationships with women for the purposes of reproduction, that's what your intellect is for. You can either be known for "contributing" to humanity by creating a batch of little shits that will probably amount to nothing, wasting most of your life in the process.

Of you can use all that wasted energy to pursue something that's TRULY useful to humanity. Artistically or otherwise.

>>7250383
>However, I think you will find that the overwhelming majority of women will not be that forward. Probably for the same reason that a man wouldn't initiate, the fear of rejection.

women do initiate romantic/sexual interaction with attractive men

>>7250383
*prophylactically not prophetically

>>7250383
>Well you can always sit around and wait for a woman to come after you.

I doubt that'll work. There is a certain kind of anxiety at least in the culture I'm a part of, that if you do not continuously chase women, you are defective as a man, which is something that women pick up on fairly quick.

Women like men who are attractive to other women, which is why men who are taken almost always get more female attention.

>>7250343
thanks anon

>>7250363
>demonstrating your stupidity by taking it so seriously.
we're posting on 4chan
id hardly call that taking something seriously

>>7250398
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5FFDj7vH6E
*raises katana to the heavens*
It's is our burden... to bear!

>>7250410
>Women like men who are attractive to other women, which is why men who are taken almost always get more female attention.

When I was in a relationship I noticed that I was more attractive even to women who didn't know I was taken, so I think it was actually just a case of me feeling more confident than is usual when I'm single.

>>7250438
I'm pretty sure that it's a combination of that, and pheromones.

I have no doubt in my mind that women can smell that you're taken, subconsciously, and thus have to prove they can steal you.

>>7250410
>Women like men who are attractive to other women, which is why men who are taken almost always get more female attention.

I'll agree there is a certain degree of truth to that. But few women would act on it overtly. And frankly you probably don't want to be in a relationship with a woman who would do that. But you can always try to run with this theory and get a more attainable woman at first and then try to upgrade from there. It would be a shitty thing to do, but you could do it. But keep in mind a woman who is willing to do that to get into a relationship with you, might also be looking for the newest model to upgrade to.

>>7250387
>The man would have to have an obscene amount of status or money, for a woman to ignore his physical appearance.

I never said women don't care about looks, of course they do, they're not a different species. I just said that they don't *just* care about looks and status, except for minority, just like men don't *just* care about looks, except for a minority (which might make up a majority of the men in this thread).

>>7250439
It's because men are more confident when not single which is attractive to women you dummylord.

>>7250446
Nah. I have no interest in pursuing women anymore. I have tried for the last 5 years, but I can't be arsed, because their standards are simply way to high for me to reach.

>>7250453
I think the majority of both men and women care about looks more than anything, because reproduction clearly isn't possible if you aren't sexually attracted.

>>7250437
I was serious ;__;

>pls no bully

MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODS

>>7250465
people generally date people of approximately equivalent attractiveness to them. maybe you ought to lower your standards

>>7250453
>I just said that they don't *just* care about looks and status

women will care about other things in a man *who they are already in a relationship with*. they will appreciate personal qualities etc. but looks and status are the only things that will make a women INITIALLY want to enter into a sexual or romantic relationship with a man.

>>7250478
that's not true. they also care about proximity

>>7250465
>I think the majority of both men and women care about looks more than anything, because reproduction clearly isn't possible if you aren't sexually attracted.

Sure, almost no one is going to date someone they don't think is physically attractive. But most people find a lot of people attractive. So if you start dating someone who's physically attractive but super boring or sexist against your own gender you're probably gonna dump them and look for someone who's attractive and has a better personality.

>>7250047
don't be that rdude

>>7250474
>maybe you ought to lower your standards

Or maybe women need to stop thinking that they automatically deserve a man who is 6ft 2, lifts weights 5 times a week, makes 100k a year, and has a elephant penis, simply because they have a vagina.

>>7250465
thats kind Bullshit, because I have already seen some cases of really ugly man ( skinny, glass-wearing, really shitty genes beta faggot) being very popular with girls because of confidence

While I also saw, cases of natural alphas ( good looking guys ) single/virgins because the lack of confidence

Seriously, I meet a faggot for like 6 months, and I swear to God, like 3 different women, really attractive used to hit on him, but he was aways too beta and they lost interest on him, I was like ''omg dude, just fuck this bitch she is begging for the D''

Confidence > Looks any day, women are irrational

>>7250497
>Confidence > Looks any day, women are irrational

There's no need to even make joke. It's funnier as unintentional comedy.

>>7250490
I agree. But women will turn down someone who is average looking, but is a loyal and kind person simply by default.

And I am not interested in having to spend hours upon hours of my time in life, simply to become more attractive to the opposite sex. I'd rather read books, thanks.

>>7250496
go outside once in a while. most couples are mediocre as fuck but it's still apparently possible for them to be happy with each other

>>7250496
Nah, I see more girls dating down than guys.

>>7250496
there is a point here. even unattractive women are able to have sex with attractive men even if they can't have long term relationships with them, whereas an unattractive man will almost never be able to have sex with an attractive woman (unless, again, he is able to attain a particularly high status, which is rare by its nature)

>>7250514
this

>>7250497
>women are irrational

One year I was fucking this bitch, we were on a relationship, I was ok a good looking guy, fit ( used to workout 5 times a week ) educated, doing shit with my life

She cheated me on a fucking nigger, who doesn't even lift, uneducated, ugly as fuck he didn't even had a haircut

Of course I broke up with her, and I know she would never respect me again so I denied all her requests to come back together

Women are full of shit, they can't think they are moved for the moment, like fucking kids or even worse

Most of this is extremely reasonable. However, I think chores/childcare work distribution is a personal matter, and gender promoting acceptance practices need to enforced through blind selections, designed to highlight work/application quality, rather then affirmative action, you gets tits you're in.

>>7250497
skinny men with glasses can still be attractive you know, have nice facial symmetry, be tall, etc. the confidence thing is totally backwards, men are confident because they've had a lifetime of success with women due to their looks, rather than being successful with women because of some exogenous 'confidence'.

>>7250466
so was I

>>7250514
>go outside once in a while

But I do. I go to university in Norway. I'm sorry, but not everyone who has this world-view is automatically a /r9k/ sperglord.

>>7250526
One of my exes cheated on me with a dorky hippie beta. What does it all mean.

>>7250333
>(we're socially conditioned to do so)

It's like these people have no autonomy. It's like they're saying "I am conditioned to behave this way, and disagree with it but I'm going to do it anyway—because I am conditioned."

>>7250545
well people-watch a little more. i doubt you will see a bunch of mediocre women with alpha brad pitt bfs

>>7250516
I don't. At least not at my Uni.

The attractive women even have their own place where they sit for lunch.

>>7250497
>>7250514

Statistics + selection bias.

If it's possible for something to happen, given enough chances to, it will: sometimes ugly and hot people get together.

You're more likely to notice this precisely because it is improbable, notable. You don't really notice basically same-attractiveness couples, and if you do, you don't remember them.

>>7250550
i hardly ever see attractive women with below-average men. the problem with assessments like this is a heterosexual male is more likely to identify a given woman as 'attractive' than a given man, because he is attracted to women. so he will underestimate the looks of men relative to how women feel.

>>7250554
are you attractive yourself? if not then why do you think you deserve an attractive woman? you want women to overlook your appearance and judge you based on your moral qualities, but you won't do the same for them?

>>7250554
I guess it's because I'm in CS.

>>7250550
>i doubt you will see a bunch of mediocre women with alpha brad pitt bfs

It happens more than you think.

>>7250561
Not really no. I would say I am average looking.

But you are mistaking me entirely. I don't think I deserve anything from anyone, I am merely voicing my opinion about current culture.

>>7250561
but unattractive women are able to have sex with attractive men, because men have higher sex drives. whereas unattractive men are never able to have sex with attractive men (except in very exceptional cases).

>>7250563
i see it every now and then but i assume in those cases one or both of them has some exceptional qualities, or the dude is suffering low confidence. in retrospect my first gf was way below my league tbh but i think i had body dysmorphia or something

>>7250569
>whereas unattractive men are never able to have sex with attractive men (except in very exceptional cases).

with attractive women, i mean, of course

7. Volunteer when someone asks for a note-taker, coffee-run gopher, or lunch order-taker at your next meeting. Don’t let this task fall to women, even if they tend to volunteer (we’re socially conditioned to do so). Make sure that women aren’t being asked to do this more than men.

come on now is this satire

>>7250572
>>7250550
I think estimating these kinds of things is gonna be hard if you're only attracted to one gender. You'll probably be biased to consider the people of that gender more attractive.

>>7250537
Nah men, he was ugly, he wasn't tall, he skin was shit ( like a orange color ) Shitty haircut, ugly face

Man, getting looks you don't need a A quality genes, just drop your Doritos, start working out, get a haircut, change your habits, in less than 6 months you'll see a huge difference

Getting confidence on another hand is a very hard and long quest, and even if you build some confidence, some stuff can destroy it real quick

Besides when you are good looking but don't have the game/confidence, it creates a visual congruency error, people specially women can see there is something wrong with you when you got the looks but don't got the personality to go along with

So my advice would be focus on getting confidence on yourself first, getting looks may even take some time but is a lot easier

>>7250570
Well I suffer from low self-confidence myself, and if that's the defining characteristic that makes women like you, then I have already lost, because there's really no way I can gain any confidence at all. I've tried everything the last 10 years, even working out to the point of benching 220 pounds, and nothing made me feel better about myself as a person.

>>7250068

You think?

If a woman is in academia to begin with there's probably something wrong with her reproductive system.

>>7250610
Friedrich pls

I've been reading up this theory between contemporary "women hate", can somebody judge my summary?:

...A most obvious difference between men and women is the capabilities to bear children. And while a women maybe could in principle bear 30 children in her life, a man could father 30 children in a single day. On top of that, the time span in which a male is fertile is twice as long as the corresponding female one. Naively, one could wonder why the birth ratio of male and female babies is almost 50/50. The evolutionary answer is Darwinian fitness: more males make for a richer/healthier gene pool. While one man could impregnate all females in principle, in reality all man will compete for the possibility to bang, and this way desirable traits are favored.

The genetic game is implemented by some hard-wiring that determines nature of the different sexes:
Simply put, women are more picky about who gets to have intercourse with them, and men are better tailored for many physical actions. This is in part ensured on a chemical level through different hormone levels, which affect the brain. Importantly, less testosterone is leading to smaller average muscle grows and smaller sex drive. (The first thing women bodybuilder who jump on steroids notice is how they suddenly feel the need to get off more often.)

There will always be plenty of low value men eager to offer sex to a broad range of females, hence mere sex is easy accessible for many women, while it's a scarce good for many men. In turn, men are the sexes expected to demonstrate value, "Burden of performance":
To get sex, even a guy who is genetically blessed with above very good looks must take action. A fertile women in an environment filled by men can take a purely "reactionary" approach. This is the resulting sociological difference of how the "sexual market" presents itself to women vs. men. Naturally, from the inbalance stems a different evaluation of the role of intercourse, as perceived by men and women. From this, there also seems to stem a difficulty, in man and women, to emphasize with the other sex - to understand each others imperatives.

"A man would die for his family and a mother would die for her children. There are guys who cover their girlfriends with their bodies during shooting attacks. There are no women who give their life for their man." This is not a moral judgement, rather an expression of what presumably is the biological imperative. Women experiencing a Shakespearean love is a male fantasy.
"If a male lion is wounded by a younger stronger male, the defeated lions harem will leave him for the new lion." In fact, some animals even auto-abort their unborn children
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_effect
This translates to "If George Clooney (read `maximal status guy') comes along and shows interest in your girlfriend, then (unless bound to you by kids you already have) she will drop you for him."
Women only love the offspring and will try to get with the strongest lion.

>>7250631
>can somebody judge my summary
TL;DR

>>7250208

This tbh

If you're not related to me or currently riding my cock, you can go stand in line at the soup kitchen for all I care

>>7250631
Seems like a lot of common knowledge m8.

We all know women in reality control the future of human civilization.

>>7250656
Why is that the conclusion? If everything is unregulated via religion or whatever, I'd say the hot males are the one in charge.
Those men are also the one excused from acting according to the bullet points in the OP - volunteering to take away work load from women etc.

>If men make up the majority of many departments, editorial boards, search committees, labs and conferences, then men have to be allies in the broader cause of equality

I like how she phrases that with "if". Because these fucking idiots know that it's not really true. I was in college for 12 years, you know what half the students were? You know what half my fucking professors were? WOMEN.

Now that i'm in the working world, guess what half my co-workers are? Yeah....women.

It's like anything, all this equality shit is total bullcrap that lame women make up to explain why THEY'RE a failure. Just because you're a loser woman who couldn't make it at whatever you wanted to do, doesn't mean that all women are losers. You're actually being very anti-feminist by claiming it.

It's like the fucking rape culture bullshit. From the way they say it, colleges are rape factories like something out of death wish, roving bands of rapists running wild over the campus, raping everything they fucking see. In 12 years of college, i heard of one single rapey thing. That was a homeless guy who snuck in and jacked off on some sleeping girl's face.

>>7250679
Of course, the top shelf of men are always in charge when it comes to being leaders and making other people take orders.

But the top shelf of men will stop existing if women don't spread their legs.

>>7250466
Russian Harry Potter

>>7250631
>Naively, one could wonder why the birth ratio of male and female babies is almost 50/50
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher's_principle

I went into that article expecting to hate, but it was all actually reasonable and common sense things. People are harping on "don't talk over them" as an unnecessary advise because you shouldn't do that in academia anyway, but it is actually worth pointing out because women tend to talk a lot softer and it's therefor, probably just naturally, more tempting to interrupt them and unlike men they either naturally or through education don't respond with competitiveness to being interrupted but often just stay quiet. It would be great if they learned to stick up for themselves more, but it would also be great if guys learned to just be patient and wait one more minute to talk.

>tfw no gf

>>7250697
Thanks for that reference.
I had come across those lectures which were also interesting

https://youtu.be/LOY3QH_jOtE?list=PL848F2368C90DDC3D

Jesus, this board too?

I mean I don't disagree with you guys, tumblr tier SJWs are annoying fucks. But do you have to talk about it on every shitting board?

>>7250701
OP here. This thread was intended as a thinly veiled attempt to have an /r9k/-style thread on here, i.e. about how worthless women are and how the feminist agenda is destroying the West.

>>7250547
I had sex with a black girl who had broken her arm. She had a cast on and was in one of my classes, I said through convo we could chill and hold the popcorn while we watched a movie, and that my care would heal her arm instantly. She laughed and said yes.
That weekend we basically netflicks and chill, she asks fire help getting her sweater of, I don't stop with sweater etc etc. So we fuck, and after we are sitting watching a zombie movie and she is playing with my hair and the door rings.
Turns out it's her huge Nigerian boyfriend with groceries for her. She just introduces is and we shake hands, dude tries to death grip me but I'm stronger than I look. She just days in a friend taking care etc. He says okay and kisses her and leaves.
She carries on test of night like nothing happened, I never knew.

I was floored. Guy was huge and seemed nice. Was literally bringing her groceries woke she was fucking me.
I'm not a turbo beta, but I'm no alpha.

Years later I read a article about zoo rhinos and how alpha rhinos often raise betas kids because the betas sneek in when the alpha is out.
I realized this is essentially what happened.

>>7250682
>That was a homeless guy who snuck in and jacked off on some sleeping girl's face.

nice

>>7250741
this board is basically /r9k/ these days.

>>7250746

>is destroying

Has destroyed, you autist

>>7250746
no shit

>>7250701
It sounds sensible, but the thing i don't like is they imply the shit actually happens.

It was obviously written by someone who has little contact with men and doesn't really understand how they actually act. Like according to them all men just sit around in a circle making fart jokes and greet their female employes by saying "hey toots, nice tits today! Hey that dress is nice, but get a shorter one so i can see some dat puss one of these days." then they openly play with their dick.

>>7250741
It has to be possible to discuss this topic, without people like you always having to pull in SJWs or /r9k/.

This thread was actually civil for once.

>>7250746
People here argue less personal, not saying they are being fucked by females.
You can talk about women everywhere, but /r9k/ is particularly special in that they will defend, to death, the notion that they are individually victimized and there is nothing to change their situation.

>>7250760
No, it doesn't. Just because people don't act a certain way all the time it doesn't mean that there isn't a trend.

I became an avid feminist ally like three months ago and I can't stop. I stopped watching tv and I don't spend much time on 4chan anymore.
Here's how I did it.
-Remember the average person sucks like zero cocks a year. If you suck 5 cocks of easy gay men a day, you are 5 cocks more of a male feminist than the average person
-Don't force yourself to suck cock. Commit to suck 5 cocks a day. I swear after three days you'll feel like sucking more cock and after a month or so you should be sucking 50-100 cocks a day for pleasure
-Suck various cocks at the same time. When I grab a really big cock or one that makes me nauseous I grab another and switch. This should refresh your head. Keep them different. I suck black cock and tranny cock.
-It isn't a race. Sucking slowly won't make you tired that fast. Try to acknowledge what cocks are for you to suck fast and which aren't.
-Pay for giggolos. When you get the cocks from your own money you'll feel the need to suck them to avoid the feel of wasting your money.

>>7250765
>not saying they are being fucked by females
No, cause that would be a lie.

>>7250765
You see frogs in every thread on here now. "Chad", "normie", and "Stacy" has become part of /lit/ discourse, and there are at least 5 threads a day that are either
>"why are there no great female writers?"
>link to some shitty feminist blog - "thoughts, /lit/?"
>thread about "my gf is too dumb for me"
>etc.

They're just shitty excuses for jug-pissers to vent their bile and bring their shit to this place instead of actually discussing literature

>>7250786
You know things become memes and they go everywhere. Trump tweeted a frog, guess he goes on 9rk.

Normie is just normal fag really. The oldest term ever. Chad is new but very easy to understand. Never seen Stacy assume female Chad with different characteristics

>being so anally devastated by memes
>2015
Ishygddt

>>7250794
Chad just means anyone who's not a self-pitying anime-watching and videogame-playing manchild with a victim complex and full of ressentiment

>>7250039

Nobody has to follow these demands. Period.

>>7250800
you dont have to be all those things to be highly unsuccessful with women, you just have to be unattractive.

>>7250786
>>7250794
I find the "redpill" topic intriguing, but I nowhere see it discussed without the flavor of anger.
The only thing that tries to be at least somewhat calm is that evo-psych blog

http://therationalmale.com/2011/12/27/women-in-love

but it's also loaded with agenda.

I feel like I should post this as we're having a (semi-) non shit discussion of this topic.

Pic related is the sexual habits of Jefferson High School. About 50% of the school (class?) answered, so this is about ~half~ the school.

The bottom text is my analysis of the data.

Do note that just because two people are linked does NOT mean they were currently fucking/in a relationship, it just means that at some point in the designated time period they were involved somehow. Jeff could have kissed Stacey, who then had a 3 month period of celibacy before she also kissed Steve. She did not (necessarily) fuck either at the same time or whilst in a relationship.

>>7250808
they're tips not demands.

>>7250808
Yeah. You know....it's legal to be a dick. I bet the women who make these demands are just as guilty of doing mean shit to men they never think about.

Maybe men should write an article of demands.

My tip:

Women, don't mention that you have a boyfriend within the first 10 seconds of talking to me, implying I actually was planning on hitting on you. I wasn't, you fat ugly bitch.

>>7250813
thanks

>>7250813
>cuckloop

I chuckled.

>>7250080
It's unethical to achieve this by exploiting a weakness rather than using you're strenghts.
>in b4 exploiting a weakness is a strength

>>7250813

>cuckloop

Tell me more, this is fascinating

>>7250843
morals are for women and leftist cucks

real men take advantage whenever they can. take the redpill, cuckfuck

>>7250132

They think men are trying to imitate chauvinists like Humphrey Bogart, but really its because feminists are dour cunts that you can detect from a mile away and they won't take the hint.

>>7250843
>exploiting a weakness rather than using your strengths
No real difference, tbh. You're just drawing an arbitrary line where it's unethical to fuck any woman below the line because you've deemed her too weak. I'm a pretty smart dude and have dated some smart women, but it always starts with impressing them with your relative strength in something (their relative weakness).

>>7250825
Yeah its mostly projection. I remember when guys used to hold doors open for girls in school (10/11 years old) and the girls demanded through the teacher not to do this as it suggested that they were weak.

It didn't suggest this at all.

It suggested that the guy fancied that particular girl and the other girls probably lost their shit over it. Regardless they painted it up as 'chivalry is sexist', no doubt that's the fricking point of chivalry.

Now we have women criticising men for not being chivalrous anymore, and treating them equally and with the same level of disregard as we would treat anyone else. Tough shit. Make your minds up... Actually don't bother, because nobody is even remotely interested in what you have to say anymore. Enjoy the future you chose.

Fast forward two decades, and women are now demanding that men not give out about women holding the door open for them. I mean, seriously? WTF?

Further list of demands;

Don't roll your eyes at intellectual discussion and act as if you know everything, because you wind up saying noting of value.
Don't only provide conversational talking points to the guy who you are amorously involved with, open yourself out to the rest of the group.
Don't ask the hottest guys to have sex with you and then move your way down the list, as you get rejected. Start with your own level; you'll have better luck.
Stop being an annoying feminist.

>>7250297
kek. actually buddha refused to answer the question re: whether there was a self

There's only one thing you really can do for equality between genders as a male: Don't be involved in academia.

There will only be so many people in academia, and as many males as there are, there are that many less females. As long as there are more males than females, the problems of male-hegemony will exist no matter what you do to attempt to mitigate it in your own behavior. No matter how nice you are, if you're trying to gain attention for your ideas, you're taking attention away from the ideas of women. Nothing you could do would be as good or helpful as to simply drop out and hope for a woman to take your place.

This goes for any field involving sexual inequality (all of society, basically.) Just drop out. Your involvement itself is the problem.

>>7250974
This is some stellar b8.

>>7250977
seriously

>>7250994
Sure m8, sure.

>>7250974
hilarious

>>7250039
It becomes increasingly less reasonable

>>7250974
Thing is, there are people who actually advocate this sort of thinking, like encouraging white men to hold themselves to a super high bar of talent before they even try to take a pursuit seriously because there are too many white men into that thing.