/lit/ - Literature

>>7400973
>thinks the average person on /lit/ is smart

I've had some brilliant female professors

I live in a cave and only come out for American holidays so I never have to meet someone smarter than me. Every now and then some hot cousin will bring their bf to challenge me and I avoid conversation and eye contact playing lazy susan with these relatives until I can slink back to my cavern.

My girlfriend to be honest
She's smarter than me and I'm smarter than at least two thirds of you fuckers

>>7400973
you're mum lad, she taught me some new things

>>7400973
> the average faggot of this board
Easily. The average isn't difficult
> you
possibly

Also, if we take the average of /lit/ who are not plebs then, again, possibly.

>>7401010
Ah, I know that feel.

yes

i wouldn't admit it to their faces of course

Yes, very many.

I've met some very famous professors though. As for women I interact with more regularly, at least four.

90% of the women you could pull off the street

>Thinking the half retarded /b/ migrants on this board are intelligent

Yes. I'm a STEMfag and the three best students in my major are girls.

My mother was smarter than my father and my gf is smarter than me

>>7400973
I've met a handful that were definitely smarter than me. With all of the Christians and people from /pol/, /b/, and /r9k/ on here, I'd say the majority of women I meet are smarter than the average person on /lit/.

>>7401446
>I've met a handful that were definitely smarter than me
>With all of the Christians [...] on[sic] here

>>7400973
yes

>>7401446
heres your (you)

>>7400973
Every female and male I know is smarter than me.

>>7401515
>false modesty
>on 4chan

yeah definately. Each of the girls I sit next to in my Math and Science classes regualrly score five or more points ahead of me on tests. I'm no whiz but I def score higher than class average. If I miss five points, they miss none.
While some people don't think testing is a good way to measure intellgence, I think it is for certain things. I may be more well read than most of the girls I meet, but I am by no means more intelligent.

>>7401524
>yeah definately. Each of the girls I sit next to in my Math and Science classes regualrly score five or more points ahead of me on tests. I'm no whiz but I def score higher than class average. If I miss five points, they miss none.
You realize you need to be 18+ to be here m10?

>>7401524

If you're in highschool, you're super pleb for ever not getting perfect marks in science, and pretty pleb regarding math.

>>7400973
Yes, my wife.
Not even joking.
I sometimes tell her that she can't be all that intelligent since she married me.

>>7400973
>intelectually

>>7400973
Females can be smart and they are smart, it's just that you don't get to see it being a male, or not usually.

>>7401515
Nice to meet you /pol/friend :)

>>7401535
With honors and AP nobody smart gets perfect grades anymore, not even indians.

>>7401546
this is cute.

>>7401010
you honestly seem like such a normie i would hate you if i met you in real life i bet

>>7401546
normie get the FUCK OFF of the board right FUCKING NOW

i've never met anyone as smart as me. i know this is more a function of the people i've met than how smart i am. i do have one friend who went to a top 10 school and has some interest in literature etc. but it's pretty clear whenever we talk i know a lot more than he does about pretty much everything. but he's not really that much of an intellectual type anyway. i have no idea what talking to a legitimately highly intelligent intellectually minded person would be like.

>>7401617
i skipped most days in high school and eventually dropped out, and never cared about math or science until later. but eventually i wanted to catch up on my knowledge in math and science stuff and started reading through some of the AP material and i don't understand who the "smart kids" in college would find it difficult. aren't those guys supposed to be actually smart? AP level stuff isn't hard at all.

>>7401858
>normie
You want /r9k/, not /lit/. We're normal people here.

>>7401878
posted on 4chan

>>7401878
r-reeee ...

>>7401884
4chan is one of the biggest sites on the Internet (Alexa rank 797), it's not your secret club anymore

>>7401515
okay socrates

>>7400973
yes, several

this one girl in particular who happens to be my suitemate's gf is godlike. my suitemates and i could be trying to figure out some interesting math problem that comes into the convo (we're STEMfags at an ivy league), and we'll solve it maybe after a half hour of discussion. we ask the same question to my suitemate's gf when shes comes to visit my suitemate and she'll solve it instantly

my suitemate jokingly says that he's only dating her cause she's smarter than him. the amazing part is that my suitemate is already sp00ky smart

I'm not smart, I'm just into weird shit, most people here probably same, there are tons of people who are smarter than that, and girls have a different kind of "smart" usually, like, smart in life or something. Much more fucking useful than rereading same obscure novels for the fifth time desu senpai.

>>7401379
Let it go, my son. We're not here to fight

smarter than me, yeah

growing up somewhere that's not a shithole helps

any married woman is smarter than the average user of this board

There's one girl who I had in a first-year university class. We added each other on Facebook and then never talked after that but I still see updates from her on my news feed. I'm in my fifth year of university with average grades after a major change. She graduated last year with like a 3.9 GPA. And we're at a T20 in the world university. She also did a shit ton of extracurricular including being the leader or something of the school's Model UN. And she has more friends to her name than people I've met at school. Now she's in law school. I don't know how she does it. She's living the dream I always wanted but never had the energy or discipline or work ethic or perseverance to achieve. I'm scared shitless of whether or not I'll get into a decent law school at all with my 2.8 GPA, though I have medical documentation to prove a serious disability. Sometimes I wonder if she even sleeps at night or if she just takes adderall or something. Then I wonder if I should start taking adderall. Maybe getting off /lit/ and doing something useful would be a start.

>>7401446
>With all of the Christians
Oh, sorry, I'll leave.

>>7402027
Bye

If there was, I would never know.
When it comes to mathematics women are pretty even with men, I don't know about philosophy.
They can't seem to get programming right.
But for some unknown reason, they make very good mystics.

>>7402027
Thank gOD.

>>7402032
Ja ne~

If you come to this place regularly you're dumber than 90% of anyone who's ever lived

Yeah but she was an ice queen Straussian that only liked to fuck people equal to or below her level of intellectualism. Nice titties tho

>>7400973
>met a female that was fully more smart and intelectually superior

oh, totally, bro. chicks are dumb, right?

>>7402037
You just wait till I see your ass hanging out the gate to purgatory like in that doré engraving saying "oh please help me" and I'll just roll my eyes and fly somewhere.

>>7401847
Well I'm in university, am in a stable relationship, have friends, a healthy family life, etc...
But I also have terrible anxiety and am schizophrenic, not to mention I've read way more books than you could ever name, so idk man. I live in both worlds

>>7402039

>>7402053
>implying your post is pleasing to God.

>>7402055
the amore-propre is strong in this one

I meet one on diving voyage. She was 17. Smart and pretty

One of my good friends was top of our class, reads pynchon (though, because I recommended it, but that's besides the point), as well as Russian authors (she reads more than these two, but they're just exemplars), and has a photographic memory/is very funny.
Basically the definition of alpha female.

Maybe my mom. She's a top tier parent, fluent in German, has a master's degree, loves fine arts, etc. Most patrician woman I've ever met.
she even busted through Ulysses recently having been spurred on by my newly found love of classics

Yes. I had a class with this Bosnian girl in eighth grade. She was probably the smartest person that I've ever met, scoring straight As across the board and taking part in a hell of a lot of extracurricular activities. She'd know more about a lot of things than most of the teachers, and, trust me, our school was a prestigious one.

Thinking back, I realize that she had a thing for me, but I was a shy doofus - which was - perhaps - the reason as to why she liked me in the first place, but also the reason as to why I never made a move.

>>7401428
Biolology?

>>7402021
you're just wasting much of your potential m8, nothing new here, 99% of the population does it.

>>7401532

I wasn't aware math and science class don't exist in college

>>7402021
>I'm scared shitless of whether or not I'll get into a decent law school at all with my 2.8 GPA
This is off-topic, but no, not even with a 180 LSAT. No, you won't. You're fucked.

Yes, but it rarely happens. When it does its weird and wonderful in a way.
>went on a date with a girl smarter than me
>she had a pretty face but she wasn't sexually attractive to me
>I was in a relationship at the time
>didn't kiss her on the first date, nor on the second for the reasons stated above
>it got weird and I never saw her again
Oh well

>>7400973
I used to think so, but then I realized they're all specialists who can't think or reason at all outside of the very paradigms they were educated within.

>>7402115
>Thinking back, I realize that she had a thing for me

lol don't kid yourself, milhouse

>>7401253
>you're

Your

>>7402120
top kek

I've met I think three smart women ever

>>7400973
I've met plenty of women smarter than I and those others on this board...In terms of better writers, that much I don't know.

>>7402286
This is the correct answer. Anyone who disagrees just hasn't had enough experience.

Gf is probably way smarter than me although she doesn't know it.

>>7402286
I've known female Oxford PhD students who study STEM, so presumably you'd think they are pretty smart right? If you try to discuss any other intellectual topics outside of their course, they haven't a clue how to respond.

>>7400973
Only one.

>>7400973
Nope

I have never met a female that can understand how an economy works, how a bank works or how an internal combustion engine works

Females can't into critical thinking, they get through their academic years parroting bullshit

>>7402303
Your a newfag

>>7402115
iktfb

>>7402346
One is kind of my Simone and I her Sartre
She knows she is second only to me :^)

>>7400973
This is not a good question to ask on this board OP, because you are going to get 2 answers.

The first answer is from the people who genuinely don't believe women can be intelligent, and the rest of the answers are from ego-tripping philosophy graduates who think they're smarter than everyone because they wrote a bachelor's thesis on Protagoras.

You should probably keep that in mind next time you ask such stupid questions.

>>7400973
The best Shakespeare scholar I ever met was a woman.

Also the best working poet.

Also at least five of my fellow grads in a foreign language program whose ideas about translation and grammatical theory are far more original and useful than mine.

The department chair, who is world renowned, as well.

They are out there, OP. They tend not to rush the Greeks, and they rarely visit bars.

>>7402053
>post-contrarian christian rorscharch

>>7400973
>Not fedora
>a female

>>7402346

>I have never met a female that can understand how an economy works,

No one does, really.

>>7400973
Fact: Women are by default manipulative.

If a guy is dumb he's transparently so. If a girl is dumb she has it hidden in between thousand layers of deception making you think she's actually quite clever.

Add to that that most men can't really think that well around pretty girls/women and you start to see things a lot more clearly.

Also i think independent thought and original thought is a far better indicator of intelligence than how good people are at doing what the system(for example the schoolsystem) wants them to do.

So if women really were so smart where are the great female thinkers?

>>7402760
Maybe you can say it like this:

Women are socially intelligent and worldly stupid.
Men are socially stupid and worldly intelligent.

>>7402760
I don't think girls were allowed to think pre-1850s

i like how you can tell when /pol/r9k/ is actively shitposting and when /lit/ is free from outside cancer by the hours at which posts are made

>>7402812
ikr

>>7402809
Girls are not interested in thinking. Haven't you seen those t-shirts women wear that says: don't think, /feel/.

From their worldview it is much more profound to /feel/ than to think, but i do think that says something about their capacity for it...

And you are completely mistaken btw. The greatest thinkers of the world have usually come from families well off and in those families there have been both women and men of course.

It was still the men who broke out and started writing & thinking. Even if you were right, where are the women after 1850? And if you want to play the blame society game i can one-up you on that too, because men have consistently broken free from society and where are the examples of women doing the same thing?

Maybe you think we are talking strength here, not intelligence, but strength is needed if you want to think brave thoughts, if you want to think freely and originally.

>>7402831
>Girls are not interested in thinking. Haven't you seen those t-shirts women wear that says: don't think, /feel/.
I don't think t-shirts make for good argumentative evidence

>From their worldview it is much more profound to /feel/ than to think, but i do think that says something about their capacity for it...
Isn't this based up your conjecture of what a female worldview is? Your reasoning is circular.

>And you are completely mistaken btw. The greatest thinkers of the world have usually come from families well off and in those families there have been both women and men of course.
Great thinkers do often come from well to do families, mainly because their position allows for the focus on their art, rather than the base needs for survival. However, this isn't relevant to the societal expectations of gender. Even wealthy women were not expected to read or write, but rather to cook, sew and clean.

>It was still the men who broke out and started writing & thinking. Even if you were right, where are the women after 1850? And if you want to play the blame society game i can one-up you on that too, because men have consistently broken free from society and where are the examples of women doing the same thing?
There are many famous female authors who have done the same thing as these men. Females with prominent positions in academia have increased once they were allowed into universities and colleges during the turn of the century, who'd have thought that women with educations end up being more educated?

>Maybe you think we are talking strength here, not intelligence, but strength is needed if you want to think brave thoughts, if you want to think freely and originally.
Strength of will to think boldly is a lot easier when you come from a lineage in which academic intellectualism is encouraged, rather than repressed. Consider Africans, a race of people who were constantly oppressed, subject to slavery. How many "strong" black men have become "great thinkers" in the past? Perhaps even fewer than women. To think there is something inherent in a person's capacity to "think deeply" purely from race or gender seems problematic, considering the range of mental ability we have seen in contemporary thinkers of varying genders and ethnicity. Nothing in the inherent nature of people has changed as society has progressed, so perhaps it is the changing society and its expectations which has affected different people's ability to think.

>>7400973
sure.

>>7402021
>letting grades decide you self worth
Stop that shit my man. I've met people with far worse grades than me that I've considered smarter than me, and I've met people with much better grades that are complete, absolute bricks.

>>7402871
>To think there is something inherent in a person's capacity to "think deeply" purely from race or gender seems problematic

>>7402871
how come blacks have archieve more in music than females from all races even when slavery was still going on?

how come XIX century black slaves invented the basis of XX century popular music while free women haven't done shit and invented a popular genre?

>>7402871
Hello jew.

>>7402760

This entire post is terrible.

>>7402805

Jesus Christ that is simple.

>>7402871
>range of mental ability we have seen in contemporary thinkers of varying genders and ethnicity

This "range" seems awfully shallow considering black authors keep talking about their own black navel and women do the same.

>>7402898
It's called a simplification you dimwit.

>>7402907
I suppose i should explain that too since perhaps it's not obvious to you. A simplification helps us get a footing on reality and enables us to dig deeper into the topic at hand.

>>7402888
do you seriously believe only black men created Negro music?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yhis33IOXN0

I feel as though you're one of those /pol/tards who are not willing to change their views no matter what others say, because you're not arguing for the sake of intellectual discussion, but rather as a mouthpiece for you to express your own opinions, because, like everyone else, you like you hear the sound of your own voice.

>>7402904
Believe it or not, there are actually female and black professors/academics who are intelligent, and likely more accomplished and learned than you are. People who are too obsessed with the "best of the best" end up generalizing, only using the most famous authors they know as examples, because they are not well-read enough to have a full understanding of the topic.

>>7402907
>>7402920
simplifications can also be over-generalized and end up being ultimately misinformed. I'm sure /pol/ loves them, because it perpetuates the stereotypes they thrive on.

>>7402055
>terrible anxiety
>has gf

normies thinking mental problems are cool s m h

>>7402934
You can still get a gf even with mental problems as long as you're not hideous.

Absolutely. You just don't meet them at the socioeconomic strata from which posters of this board come from. The atmosphere of middle class American life isn't exactly conducive to the intellectual development of women - they have no pressure to develop those skills, even if they have the ability.

On the other hand, in academia I'm consistently blown away by extremely intelligent, articulate women.

>>7400973
Yes. And I love her. But she is taken.

>>7400973
No, never. I've only met two people smarter than me in my entire life: my school's engineering professor and a living genius, Dr. Abernathy, and a young black man I met on the streets of Boston who successfully conned me out of $20. But these are anomalous persons. In truth, I am smarter than 98% of the population, including most women.

Maybe one or two. I was in love with a brilliant female philosopher in my department. Never worked out.

>>7403030
>But she is taken.
So? I swear you faggots will let any little detail stop you.

>>7403064
It's important to respect other men's property

Yes, a decent amount. There's no question though that the vast majority of people I consider smarter than me are men.

Of the smart women I've met, a few have been attractive, which terrified me. It's one thing to meet a cute girl who isn't dumb, and gets your jokes and whatnot, but it's a completely different matter when a girl is clearly your superior intellectually. It's hot, in a way, but also fucking scary when you have absolutely no idea what's going on in a girl's head.

Never.

Even the female 'professors' at my university are intellectually pathetic enough that I can regularly humiliate them by demonstrating their profound lack of understanding in just about everything.

The only area in which women have surpassed me is in social skills.That's due to an inherent low cunning rather than intelligence though.

>"Nature has not destined them, as the weaker sex, to be dependent on strength but on cunning; this is why they are instinctively crafty, and have an ineradicable tendency to lie. For as lions are furnished with claws and teeth, elephants with tusks, boars with fangs, bulls with horns, and the cuttlefish with its dark, inky fluid, so Nature has provided woman for her protection and defence with the faculty of dissimulation, and all the power which Nature has given to man in the form of bodily strength and reason has been conferred on woman in this form. Hence, dissimulation is innate in woman and almost as characteristic of the very stupid as of the clever."

>>7403101
high quality bait

>>7403104

labelling a post as bait is just an easy way to avoid having to address the arguments put forward in the post.

>>7403101
You poor little man

im not checking this for porn, stop posting lol

>>7403110
You're right. I don't even disagree with you that much, I just don't think you're serious, considering your tone.

>Even the female 'professors' at my university are intellectually pathetic enough that I can regularly humiliate them by demonstrating their profound lack of understanding in just about everything.

>>7403104
Yes, haha, those old philosophers. So stupid they were. So completely taken with their eras myths.

I remember when i thought women were men with boobies. I never got laid back then. While now, when i am more sexist than iv'e ever been i get laid right & left. I actually /see/ women now, while in the past i only saw an image in my head.

>>7403101

>>7402553
m8, simone's the better philosopher, sartre would be twice as shit without her. also: simone is terrible, get better taste and stop falling for dat ass

>>7403116
Not him but this post is what is said literally every single time someone criticises women or relationships with them; by implying that the person is question is somehow unfulfilled and broken and not actually addressing the argument.

>>7403116

Another empty response

>>7403134
>Not him but this post is what is said literally every single time someone says that God is 3 pancakes cut into differently sized triangles; by implying that the person is question is somehow unfulfilled and broken and not actually addressing the argument.

>The nobler and more perfect a thing is, the later and slower is it in reaching maturity. Man reaches the maturity of his reasoning and mental faculties scarcely before he is eight-and-twenty; woman when she is eighteen; but hers is reason of very narrow limitations. This is why women remain children all their lives, for they always see only what is near at hand, cling to the present, take the appearance of a thing for reality, and prefer trifling matters to the most important. It is by virtue of man’s reasoning powers that he does not live in the present only, like the brute, but observes and ponders over the past and future; and from this spring discretion, care, and that anxiety which we so frequently notice in people.

>>7403144
nice one
I'm going to hang myself because I got utterly btfo, bravo

:^)

>>7403147

>It is because women’s reasoning powers are weaker that they show more sympathy for the unfortunate than men, and consequently take a kindlier interest in them. On the other hand, women are inferior to men in matters of justice, honesty, and conscientiousness. Again, because their reasoning faculty is weak, things clearly visible and real, and belonging to the present, exercise a power over them which is rarely counteracted by abstract thoughts, fixed maxims, or firm resolutions, in general, by regard for the past and future or by consideration for what is absent and remote. Accordingly they have the first and principal qualities of virtue, but they lack the secondary qualities which are often a necessary instrument in developing it. Women may be compared in this respect to an organism that has a liver but no gall-bladder.9 So that it will be found that the fundamental fault in the character of women is that they have no “sense of justice.” This arises from their deficiency in the power of reasoning already referred to.

>>everyone

>>>/r9k/

>>7403154

>Because women in truth exist entirely for the propagation of the race, and their destiny ends here, they live more for the species than for the individual, and in their hearts take the affairs of the species more seriously than those of the individual. This gives to their whole being and character a certain frivolousness, and altogether a certain tendency which is fundamentally different from that of man; and this it is which develops that discord in married life which is so prevalent and almost the normal state.

>>7403161

>It is only the man whose intellect is clouded by his sexual instinct that could give that stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped, and short-legged race the name of the fair sex; for the entire beauty of the sex is based on this instinct. One would be more justified in calling them the unaesthetic sex than the beautiful. Neither for music, nor for poetry, nor for fine art have they any real or true sense and susceptibility, and it is mere mockery on their part, in their desire to please, if they affect any such thing.

>This makes them incapable of taking a purely objective interest in anything, and the reason for it is, I fancy, as follows. A man strives to get direct mastery over things either by understanding them or by compulsion. But a woman is always and everywhere driven to indirect mastery, namely through a man; all her direct mastery being limited to him alone. Therefore it lies in woman’s nature to look upon everything only as a means for winning man, and her interest in anything else is always a simulated one, a mere roundabout way to gain her ends, consisting of coquetry and pretence. Hence Rousseau said, Les femmes, en général, n’aiment aucun art, ne se connoissent à aucun et n’ont aucun génie (Lettre à d’Alembert, note xx.)

>>7403168

>Nothing different can be expected of women if it is borne in mind that the most eminent of the whole sex have never accomplished anything in the fine arts that is really great, genuine, and original, or given to the world any kind of work of permanent value... for natura non facet saltum. And Huarte, in his book which has been famous for three hundred years, Examen de ingenios para las scienzias, contends that women do not possess the higher capacities. Individual and partial exceptions do not alter the matter; women are and remain, taken altogether, the most thorough and incurable philistines; and because of the extremely absurd arrangement which allows them to share the position and title of their husbands they are a constant stimulus to his ignoble ambitions. And further, it is because they are philistines that modern society, to which they give the tone and where they have sway, has become corrupted. As regards their position, one should be guided by Napoleon’s maxim, Les femmes n’ont pas de rang; and regarding them in other things, Chamfort says very truly: Elles sont faites pour commercer avec nos faiblesses avec notre folie, mais non avec notre raison. Il existe entre elles et les hommes des sympathies d’épiderme et très-peu de sympathies d’esprit d’âme et de caractère. They are the sexus sequior, the second sex in every respect.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum

>>7403168
>>7403161
>>7403154
>>7403147
>t. old white man #51029
lol didn't read shitlord

It's 2015 for gods sake!

>>7403178

Perkele!

be quiet womyn, gb2 kitchens :DDD

>>7403128
So basically you were so bitter you couldn't get laid back then that you basd your entire worldview around sex?

>>7403158
Stop trying to compartmentalize truth. You jewing bastards always try to label certain opinions as this or that in order to discredit them. Well it's not going to work anymore. People are waking up.

Where am I supposed to me patrician girls now that I'm done with uni? I go to the local library pretty often but the only women there are over 50 or under 10

>there are people on /lit/ RIGHT NOW who have never been taught about literature by an Oxford dame that knows more about medieval lit than this entire board combined

>>7403191
>jewing
>>>/pol/

>>7403188
cheg ur privelige shitlord :DDDD

>>7403195
>an Oxford dame that knows more about medieval lit than this entire board combined
and not much else, presumably?

>>7403195
>knowledge
>intelligence
Nice defense of y'lady there

>>7403101
>>7403147
>>7403154
>>7403161
I can never tell if the people writing these has a very low opinion of women or a very high opinion of men. All the faults that are pointed at women are equally present in most men.

>>7400973
Various lecturers, teachers and a few friends.

In the West, the woman, that is to say the “lady,” finds herself in a fausse position; for woman, rightly named by the ancients sexus sequior, is by no means fit to be the object of our honour and veneration, or to hold her head higher than man and to have the same rights as he. The consequences of this fausse position are sufficiently clear. Accordingly, it would be a very desirable thing if this Number Two of the human race in Europe were assigned her natural position, and the lady-grievance got rid of, which is not only ridiculed by the whole of Asia, but would have been equally ridiculed by Greece and Rome. The result of this would be that the condition of our social, civil, and political affairs would be incalculably improved.The European lady, strictly speaking, is a creature who should not exist at all; but there ought to be housekeepers, and young girls who hope to become such; and they should be brought up not to be arrogant, but to be domesticated and submissive.

>>7403205
It's pretty much people who want to see themselves as worthy or superior by affiliating themselves with a particular group of people. It makes you feel better.

>>7403203
Yeah sure thing kid, your very own special vision of intelligence, which I bet just so happens to be one you possess, is the one true standard of intelligence.

>>7403205

>the people writing these

Schopenhauer is the author you ignorant pleb.

>>7403218
All of them? I could swear only two of them were from him, whatever. Anyway, Schoppy has his head so far up his own ass in some arguments that he cannot tell the difference between his own personal feelings and reason, and often disguises the first as the latter.

>>7403221

>hasn't read author
>yet claims to know better than him

yep, that's a woman all right

>>7403190
Huh? What does this even mean? No, i'm not Freud or a feminist theorist.

>>7403228
>he takes Schopenhauer seriously
Oh come on man, have some respect for yourself.

>>7402907

I used an adjective instead of a noun, signifying the same thing. You're a fucking idiot.

It's simplification to the point of complete and utter uselessness. It's the level of abstraction a child would use.

0/10, horrible post. Be ashamed.

In grade school I thought the girls were smarter than me. I don't remember thinking that about a single girl in high school.

In college I only met one girl who I thought was smarter than me, she was basically a genius.

I identify with your angst, op. Even though I've met a lot of great and fun girls, and few of whom were even really well-read/studied a lot, I've never met a women who would really strike me as wise. The closest probably came this hindu nun who was an instructor in my meditation class - but still, she didn't seem as strikingly brilliant and radiating gravitas (I can already see someone writing this off as subjective) as few (and by 'few' I really mean 'few') intelligent men I met in my life.

I remember reading somewhere that statistically in regards to intelligence, women's gaussian curve is more narrow (meaning that more end up in the average range, as opposed to the men who are more prone to end up in either high or low ranges). My life experience so far reflects this. I'm really sceptical about this trend, since one of the basic tenets of my spirituality is the idea of an androgynous soul, and I am by no means happy about it. Still, however much I scrutinize my own position, the trend seems to be there.

>>7403028

>The atmosphere of middle class American life isn't exactly conducive to the intellectual development of women - they have no pressure to develop those skills, even if they have the ability.

And here I was under the wrongful impression that more women went to college and got a longer education than men.

But of course, I'm sure they don't actually develop their intellectual prowess in these places of higher education - they are women, after all, and women r dumb.

>>7403233

Oh look, yet another empty response that consists only of a personal attack and fails to address any of the points made.

>>7403233
i thought that we trolled better than that m8

>>7403244
How can I address the substanceless void that are Schopenhauer's arguments with anything but an equally empty response?