/sci/ - Science & Math

they isnt a barbie scientist doll.

Plus women need to start off with something easy, like with engineering

too dumb

Culturally we haven't supported women in science until recently.

A reasonable answer would be the media, but everyones uses that as an excuse for the source of all bad.

Because women tend to think emotionally and not with logic/reason?

Kari doesn't know anything about science or engineering, she's there for tits. Not that I mind.

>>1100382
You really need to ask? You might be a woman yourself.

i save this picture just for these threads

Women tend to cluster. There were no women in the sciences, so they had no incentive to join. Now, a few have independent minded women have become scientists, and the rest are starting to follow.

Pretty pathetic really. Good women go into science to get away from the rest of them, and then they follow.

>>1100382

This is just an opinion, but every woman I've ever met was terrible at improvisation.

>>1100418
>femanon here

Because ignorant = blase, and blase = cool.

Women are a little less motivated at conquering hard systems like in those in physics.

The explanation as a whole is probably complicated, but I imagine it has much to do with our culture, and the social role females are brought up to fill. There may also be natural disposition, but if so it's probably negligible.

>>1100441
lol

This poses a number of interesting questions. Let us assume for a moment that admittance processes are transparent (and the demographics of those admitted and those applied are the same). We know that there are more women in university than men - some 55% of university students are women. However, the natural sciences, mathematics, and engineering remain male-dominated. There is a question you must ask before you pose yours: is this because women do not apply to math, science, and engineering programs, or are those fields saturated with male applicants? Or both? A saturation of male applicants would explain both phenomenon at once: the overall gender ratio, and the technical gender ratio. This is important as high school attainment would suggest university attendance in much more equal numbers.

Perhaps the social sciences and arts are perceived as emasculation by men, or similarly that a math or science career is one less feminine.

Hypatia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypatia

>>1100454
Culture, more often then not, has more of an effect compared to genetics. I'm not sure how true that is in this situation though.

>What's your hypothesis to explain why there are so few women in math, physics, and philosophy

sexual dimorphism.

Women are too busy forming babby.

>>1100473

Question still remains, citing a single female does nothing to disprove a disparity in ratio of male to female scientist/mathematicians

>>1100473
ah yes, the only female philosopher anyone can name

i went through engineering school etc and based on the people I knew there I find it very hard to believe that it is anything besides a basic genetic difference, there is something in the y chromosome that makes people able to think like an engineer.

not only were only like 5% of my classmates female, the female ee majors were just shit tier and probably were only there because their dads failed to produce male offspring and felt bad about it later. or something, never figured it out and kinda stopped caring because 5% of girls in college translated to 0% girls at work, unless you count receptionists etc.

Its cause we have different goals
Women care about people, men care about stuff and theories
Like if a woman does science is so that she can "help people" or be a "good role model" or just to make some money. They're not really interested on the inner workings of the universe

Because all the female scientific talent of the last century was concentrated into Marie Curie.

There aren't as many smart women as smart men.

Women aren't self-motivated enough to do independent research; they prefer to take orders from dominant males.

Women are lazy.

The male nerds that congregate into the sciences creep girls out; girls would much rather socialize and go to clubs to get drilled by some douchebags.

>>1100499
The thing about the y chromosome that lets you think like an engineer? Women can't be gay. And if I meant lesbian I'd have said lesbian. Women can't knock cocks, and its an engineering requirement.

>>1100483

I often fantasize about having a daughter and raising her in isolation from outside cultural sources to observe how it would affect development. Obviously one child is a pretty tiny sample size, but I still imagine it being interesting.

>>1100508
I'll keep that in mind when I talk to my engineering friends

>>1100508
> Women can't be gay. And if I meant lesbian I'd have said lesbian.

Are you saying women can't be men?

Bravo, chap.

I just finished nursing school, a female dominated field. There is a significant difference in thought processes. The women that are graduating with me have a problem compiling facts and formulating a whole patient view. I understand that the baby who is hypoglycemic is hypoglycemic because mom was on corticosteroids, not because of some of some other unknown factor. It's not that fucking hard.

btw, Civil engineer, mental health therapist and now a nurse.

I see plenty of women in my STEM classes. I'd say it's about 50/50 on average.

>>1100530
>having a daughter and raising her in isolation from outside cultural sources

some guy tried that, ended up impregnating her and going to prison. i don't recommend you attempt this unless you take lots of pictures.

>>1100538
>civil engineer
>now nurse
Whyyy?

if it is any indication, female humor doesn't tend to be abstract and crazy, but social and contextual. Maybe that's an indicator they they care less about abstract stuff required in these areas

A perpetuation of gender roles, caused by bad teachers in childhood.
IIRC, an Ars Technica article quoted a study that supported this hypothesis. Women, who have a higher natural tendency to teach young children, become elementary school teachers. Since their female elementary school teachers weren't good at math, they became afraid of math and aren't good at math. The girls they teach become afraid of math also, etc.

I'm not doing it justice, but meh.

>>1100471
Interesting explanation is interesting

I guess women dont usually gravitate toward science

>>1100506

you could say she was irradiated with care

YEAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!

of course there are exceptions, but generally:

men = obsessive personalities.

women = balanced lifestyles.

same reason why 99% of rock stars, scientists, engineers, rich investors, political leaders, and basically anyone important or cool are men.

Science is hard

>>1100556
Did all your male teachers suck at stringing a sentence together?

>>1100556
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/01/female-teachers-math-anxiety-influences-female-students..
ars
Here's the article.

Ok i'll stop pretending to be polite and be honest about this
Women have an easier time memorizing stuff, however they SUCK at logic
That's why they do better in school. Because its all memorization.

>>1100562

>>1100568
so cool = crazy?

>>1100572
English isn't my first language.

But yes.

My school is the only university in Canada to have a higher male to female ratio, simply because science, math and engineering are primarily why it is well-known.

It's because most females dun like complicated shit, and go into arts. Arts degree are valuable too, you know. They're the ones taking care of children at home, which is necessary for a healthy family.

>>1100584
cool= successful
Something you only get if you obsess about something

because women like to get laid.

>>1100578

I can't reason as to the theoretical stance that woman simply are poor at logical inferences, but woman do have larger limbic systems and as a result greater emotional intensity.

If there's anything I know about emotion (not a ton) it's that it fucks with my rational and responsive judgement. But take that all with a grain of salt

>>1100600
>>1100600
>>1100600
>>1100600

>>1100382
because woman don't like challenging. woman are raised as pets for the future

>>1100593
where success is defined in the usual biased way

>>1100611
i meant
successful =cool

men get into it more because men are discouraged from expressing/embracing emotion. They also tend to be time-consuming fields and do not facilitate social interaction. Women get more attention from others and so are more confident that people want them to participate in social events.

>>1100578
femanon here. Hasty generalization is hasty

>>1100600
>>1100603

Science and general nerdiness being socially divided from sex is a direct result of disproportionate ratios between men and woman in said fields.

IE, more woman become scientists, more men and female scientists get laid ultimately thwarting the cultural view of nerdiness. Not to say that scientists don't get laid as is.

>>1100621
finally an explanation that says the guys are the one's with a problem

Cultural dictation.

Shit sucks.

>>1100621
men express true emotion. woman express momentary emotion which is why they are known as whores

>>1100636
Why would a lack of desire for or disposition to emotion be a negative trait? Neither gender is "wrong" in this discussion, there isn't a problem with any parties involved.

Chicks don't like nerds, so they avoid nerd holdouts like the plague.

Isn't it funny how this is all caused by 50% of the population having a slightly shorter 24th chromosome?

Women have had all of human history to show they're able to show that they're competent at something and yet they haven't
Am I seriously supposed to believe that "the man" has been putting women down for as long as time itself?
Women scientists are nothing but a trend in rebellion in their part and I'm not really amused

>>1100625
/ic/ is that way --->

>>1100636
>implying no emotion and no social interaction are problems

Also, males and females aren't very different. Nature is not the governing factor here; nurture is.

Parenting, culture, and environment play great roles in the development of a child.

Because math is hard.

>>1100658
well, if it is correlated with depression (as lack of social contact is), then even the person themselves might think it is a problem

It's because men are attracted to truth, and science reveals the truth of the universe. Women are attracted to pretty lies and so they are drawn to fields where they can lie about things (art, acting, journalism, marketing, etc).

>>1100677

"The beauty of life isn't the atoms that go into it, but how they are assembled."

assemble those 24 chromosomes differently and you'll have a lot more diversity than a disparity in ratio in science fields.

>>1100686
ironic picture is ironic

Here's something that might be interesting for you, femanon.

http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm

>>1100621
That's the worst piece of female propaganda I've heard so far

>>1100636
Actually somebody said nearly exactly that in more fluid terms waaaaay up here >>1100471

>>1100703
You can add one chromosome and turn a human into a retard...

>>1100471
That's bull
Science and math is looked down by most people because they generally assume they're nerds

>>1100621
First sentence is true. Second sentence is true. Third sentence is bullshit; women are of notoriously low self-esteem.

>>1100703
girl don't know that people have 46 chromosomes

>>1100683
but I likes /sci/ ;(
(femanon leaves answering OP's question in the process)

>>1100711

So far it sounds like a good, objective read on a subject riddled with gender related bias. Thanks for the link anon!

>>1100471
A simpler solution can be found if you look at the intelligence bell curves of men and women. The averages are quite close, but men are more likely than women to be of high or low intelligence. Women are more likely to be of average intelligence. This should result in a greater number of women entering college than men, but men occupying a far greater percentage of slots in difficult subjects like physics.

>>1100471
Or maybe its because men know that they'll need to get a job to support a family after they graduate and they can't afford to dick around as much

>>1100740
>expects people to care

>>1100745
On the contrary; if there is a shortage of university seats (which there are), such a case would have a disproportionate amount of men in all fields.

>>1100740
Show us your tits

>>1100711
> Both men and women hold much more favorable views of women than of men. Almost everybody likes women better than men. I certainly do.

pfffffffffffffffffffffff haha oh wow someone introduce her to 4chan

>>1100757
>implying post wasn't a joke

>>1100778
newfag...
it's tits or GTFO

>>1100782
>expects people to care

>>1100778
>>1100778
>>1100778

>>1100747
too right. being in college doesn't mean anything.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/29/your-money/student-loans/29money.html?src=me&pagewanted=all

Skip to paragraph 30 and lol (starts 'She recently received a raise')

>>1100773
But even someone of below average intelligence can succeed in the fields that women tend to study. There are more men too stupid to succeed at those than there are women. Then there's the issue where men are more encouraged to try a difficult field and fail, whereas women will succeed at an easy field.

>>1100773
What country are you in? There are plenty of school in the US that will admit just about anyone. If you think there is a shortage of openings you need to lower your standards.

>>1100781

lol I stopped reading at that point. basically decided that there's no freakin way I'm going to relate to this author etc.

Boys think good can be dissociated from truth. When they see a good girl they think thats all they need to be happy, they dont need to desire truth and understanding. It make you look bad,and just being a good ( doesnt require a lot of mental activity) will keep boys pleased.

>>1100473
Lesbians have male brains, hypatia was either a lesbian or asexual (she certainly didn't care for men). Ergo lesbians are awesome just like men.

>>1100781

4chan loves women, bro. We call them whores and bitches, but we also have tons of ronery threads and "show tits pls" posts.

>>1100816
But what about Turing and the other possibly homosexual scientists?

>>1100778

>>1100811
>>1100781
It's not feminist bullshit, if that's what you're thinking.

>>1100816
Not true
Dikes are at the bottom of the gene pool
Look up Rossie O'donnel

>>1100836
bad shoop is bad

>>1100831
They're men so it all works out somehow.

>>1100831
Turing had a female brain?

>>1100811
Huh. The guy does make a good point about men being more likely to be smarter or more stupid and less likely to be average compared to women, and how that results in lower average GPA because it's capped too low, and higher average salary because it's got a cap on the bottom.

>>1100843
>It's not feminist bullshit

but actually yes, it is. men have dominated everything since forever and anyone that thinks women are superior is freakin retard. that makes no sense.

>>1100853
fucking miracles

>>1100826
"show tits pls" posts expresses love?

>>1100881

It certainly expresses a fondness for women. Or at least their tits.

>>1100875
All history shows is that during times when being smart didn't matter and strength was all that counted men dominated. The rest is just explained by conservation of existing power structures

>>11008444chan loves women, bro. We call them whores and bitches, but we also have tons of ronery threads and "show tits pls" posts.

We don't want them around because we like them, we want them around because we like tits and vagoo. If women didn't look pretty and have fun holes they may as well not exist.

>>1100826
Manhating dikes like that aren't lesbians, they're just too ugly and stupid for any man they dated to not want to beat them so they gave up on men.

>>1100875
He's not saying that women are better, he's saying that most people (wrongly) think better of women.

>>1100814
So women learn that mean don't really care about what girls think only how she acts.

>>1100890
it's treats them as fap material i.e. objects

>>1100890
Tits are great. Women are cunts though.

>>1100897
I'm gay and I don't hate men. Though I'm not liking you that much.

>>1100890
So gold-diggers certainly expresses a fondness for man. Or at least their money.

>>1100904

And how is that not expressing a fondness for women? It's crude and unrefined most certainly. But let's hypothesize: Would a member of 4chan rather be stuck in a room full of women or full of men?

>>1100901
Well men have no way of knowing what a woman thinks, we can only see how she acts.

Ask a man what he's thinking, get an answer. Ask a woman what she's thinkng, "LIES LIES LIESLEIS LIES!"

>>1100896
And yet women have yet to prove that their capable of anything other than rote memorization
Face it, if it wasn't for men there would be no technological progress.
You girls need to stop being so jealous and realize that "nerds" make the world go round

ask a man what he's thinking and he responds "I dunno, nothing"

>>1100896
>Implying that developing agriculture, industry, science, technology, and civilization itself doesn't require being smart.
Perhaps you should learn more about history before you try and explain what it shows.

>>1100927
Talking to her. Conversation, unfortunatly even the ones who call themselves scientists are not really interested in talking to women.

The message girls have is: you dont care at all what you think if you act goddy and look good.

>>1100949
>implying that gender roles didn't predate all that shit

I blame liberal arts

>>1100382
>>1100441

agreed, WTF does being a "femanon" have to do with the question.

Nothing.

But the question is so stupidly worded that it mist be a troll

>>1100917
Funny you should say that, half of my friends are lesbians. They're the awesome nerdy lesbian not the stupid manhating lesbians though. Likely because they make much better friends than straight girls (who are absurdly shallow and fickle).

....OH i get the joke here. ha ha ha. good one OP but you cant fool me! BECAUSE THERE ALL IN THE KITCHEN!!!! ha ha ha ha. good one

>>1100927
Ask a woman what she's thinkng, "LIES LIES LIESLEIS LIES!"

that should be a great reason to dump her, she is cheating with truth.

But there is no way you break with her if she acts goody and look good.

>>1100956
>implying women didn't willingly conform because it was more convenient

>>1100962
>so stupidly worded that it mist
FAIL

>>1100956
>BAWWW Women are and always have been oppressed!

>>1100948ask a man what he's thinking and he responds "I dunno, nothing"

We only say that when the correct answer will make you cry, for example "having sex with your sister". When we aren't thinking about sex with other women we'll give you an honest answer. Those of us that are on the high end of the intelligence spectrum anyway.

>>1100980
>implying getting married off to whoever daddy saw fit was fun

>>1100979
Answer men, do you really expect more from your girlfriend/wife that she acts goody and look good?

>>1100956
>Implying that those gender roles didn't develop naturally due to natural gender differences.

>>1100965
I don't really understand straight girls

>>1101004
>Implying it was any better to work a dry patch of dirt into productivity

>>1101018
>implying they did

>>1100956
It wasn't until the industrial revolution that women realized that they weren't completely useless, since jobs could be done with little strength and repetitive actions
Before that women didn't want to risk breaking a nail

>>1101004
>implying a woman's criterion for her marriage isn't exactly the same as her father's (money)

oh you

>>1100979
If you only date women that don't lie you're going to be ronery

>>1101036
>Gender roles predates human society
>No way it can be natural
This is why women can't science.

Females have the biological role of childbearing and caring for children. Naturally, women have the instinct to care and protect, which, when you magnify it with whatever humans have that makes us supercool, makes it so that women are naturally more in tune with others than men. Men have traditionally had the role of hunting food and securing survival needs for the tribe, clan, etc, so the problem solving and logic is more predominate in males (how can I catch this motherfucking deer...). Now there's tons of supporting examples, and probably not even a lack of counterexamples, but this is what is fairly general in terms of the way males make more use of the left brain and women use more of the right. Or how the L/R brain is commonly associated.

>>1101035
economic inequality sucks too, but that's no reason to ignore gender inequality

>>1101025I don't really understand straight girls

Feel glad you don't have to put up with them (except for the straight girls that are experimental gay for attention). They're absolute cunts.

>>1101060
What the hell are you talking about?

>>1101045
>implying you're a douchebag

>>1101069
>inferring I'm a douchebag

good QED btw

>>1101059
Do people still actually believe this garbage or am I being trolled?

>>1101069
so he's not a douschebag?
>doing it wrong

>>1101080
both...

>>1101067
the example was specifically about a lower class form of labor. It's not like all men had to work the land. many had better opportunities

>>1101045
>If you only date women that don't lie you're going to be ronery

Lonely will be all girls who value truth, undertanding and intellect because the men really dont really care, unless it cames from a male friend.

>>1101095
Like overseeing other people work the land... or die in battle... or work the mines...

>>1101059
I'm tired of people making that mistake
Men are right brain women are left
Right brain is more instinctual and processes information faster. It was essential for hunting and survival.
Either way that's not where the biggest different lies.
Women have more white matter on their brains as opposed to gray matter found in men.

There is NOT cultural reason for it.

It is entirely biological.

Men = Intelligence - Required for the finding and acquisition of resources and defense of family/mate/children.

Women = Compulsive behaviors - Good for caring for infants.

EVERY culture, ALL peoples and races throughout the entire planet and at ALL times prior to the 20th century had a few things in common . . . See above

>>1101110

>>1101095
>the example was specifically about a lower class form of labor. It's not like all men had to work the land. many had better opportunities
Pretty much all labor was 'lower class' until a few decades ago. The vast majority of men did have to work the land. Not many men had better opportunities. lrn2history.

>>1101110Lonely will be all girls who value truth, undertanding and intellect because the men really dont really care, unless it cames from a male friend.

Not true. A woman that's honest, patient, and intelligent gains major points for an exceptionally rare trait. The ones that exhibit such are always dating douchebags 15 years their senior that mooch off of them though.

>>1101120
[citation needed]

>>1101129
> The ones that exhibit such are always dating douchebags 15 years their senior that mooch off of them though.

>>1101127
>until a few decades ago
>implying the industrial revolution didn't start in the 18th century

You realize of course that men and women think fundamentally different. We are literally wired differently in our brains. Here's a couple of articles found through a quick google search, there are certainly better scientific journals that can be quoted but you'll have to find those on your own.

http://www.livescience.com/health/080905-synapse-gap.html
http://www.livescience.com/health/050120_brain_sex.html

As much as some people try to disagree the way we think is set at the chemical and biological level and the only way to change that would be to literally alter our own biology, turning women into men and men into women.

Exceptions will always exist but women tend to think more emotionally and men more logically, this has been well known for centuries and isn't being sexist, it's simply how we are made.

>>1101115
No bro, left brain is logic and right brain is creative. but you get the fucking point, I hope

>>1101127
>implying that there haven't been cities and a merchant class for thousands of years

They are raised up to be sluts. My future daughter on the other hand will be raised to be smarter than me.

I'm going to interrupt this troll thread to point out that women who gain power and status still follow their biological drive to mate with someone with power and status in order to preserve the species; which is impossible when you make more money and have more power than the men around you.

Women who strive for power are literally removing themselves from the gene pool because they cannot find men more powerful than themselves who are single and interested in them.

>>1101161
beware drawing strong conclusions about genetic determination on an organ as plastic and environmentally sensitive as the brain

>>1101161
Most of the wiring in the brain is unlikely to be preprogrammed to the extent you wish to believe. The safest evolutionary progression is to make as many connections as possible, then let the unused one die off.

>>1101177
if you are dumb enough to think you can do that it shouldn't be too hard

>>1101154
>Implying that the start of the industrial revolution marks the exact moment when the majority of the workforce started working in factories.
>Implying that the major benefits of industrialization went into effect immediately.
>Implying that old school factory wage slaving was a notch above shit tier.
>Implying that industrialization accounts for all or most of human history.
Once again, lrn2history.

Reasonable hypothesis from reasonable anon here:

1. Women have better/larger language centers in the brain, but less developed logical/problem solving centers, compared to men. This means most women find it easier to understand interpersonal relationships and language, and harder to understand math. It also partially describes why girls prefer dolls over male-oriented toys.

2. Women get pregnant. This means, to an employer that at the drop of a hat he could lose a vital worker. This is why women aren't as valued as workers and tend to receive lower pay. It is also why women tend to find it harder to get into academia - years and years of uninterrupted study, followed by years and years of uninterrupted work, there's no room for babies until you're 35 years old, and by then your a spinster. [and your babies have a higher chance of suckage]

3. Women know damned well that they can get by just as well in life by pursuing easier careers, or not even pursuing any careers whatsoever. Why spend 15 years of your prime learning how to be boring when you could be out getting pregnant and having some dude propose to you?

The end result is that a great deal of women find scientific fields difficult and unenjoyable, with a large time investment and low pay. They basically don't get much of anything out of it. No children, no money, maybe an unsexy neckbeard husband... I daresay the women in these fields right now are only there because they honestly enjoy what they do.

And that is why women aren't into math, physics and philosophy.

>>1101184
>i'm going to interrupt this trolling to bring you... trolling

>>1101177
Yeah good luck with that.

>>1101166
>Implying that the merchant class included any more people than larger aristocracies.
>Also implying that merchants didn't incur great risk, and that trading wasn't dangerous business for most of history.
And again, lrn2history.

>>1101195
>implying that lack of awesome employment for a large part of people for a large part of history negates the badness of gender inequality where women where treated like goods

>>1101110

>Lonely will be all girls who value truth, undertanding and intellect

Not if they are hot.

>>1101184
First of all they're hypotheses, so nobody's really saying "this is the way that it is" or else there would be some science journal answering this question directly.

Secondly, that hypothesis doesn't say that evolutionary influences dictate our actions as a specific gender. They influence them, not compel them, which is why there are exceptions.

Kari Byron stole all of science's woman allotment.

>>1101220
>implying that this provides support for your original contention

that it sucked for most men doesn't show women didn't have it worse

>>1101240
BAWWWWW life sucked for 99.999% of human history.

>>1101224
No, I'm
>Implying that men were also treated as goods, it's just not convenient for feminists to acknowledge this fact.

>>1101224
>Men didn't have it any better than women, but women were still oppressed because I say so

bitches is dumb at numbers

>>1101251
and how much more it must suck to be the slave of a slave

I suspect it's because physicists know more men than women, so fewer girls become inspired than boys as knowing people who are interested in physics trickles down to the high school level, when people would be making such a decision.
I would think a similar explanation could be had for engineering, chemistry and math.
The whole thing gets solved by those in the hard sciences meeting more women, to be honest. I think if science was sexier, we'd have a lot more female scientists.

>>1101240
>Men had no 'better opportunities'
>Because there was no place for those 'better opportunities', and those few that existed were not much better
>This argument is inconsistent
That's woman logic for ya.

OP, you better fucking have internet in your kitchen, or I may have to alert the authorities.

>>1101228

Especially if they are really hot, because men would not listen a word she has to say they would be just figuring out how to get laid. She would not be able to relate on the intellectual level unless she was a dude.

>>1101264
See
>>1101254
For a chance to realize how stupid you sound.

>>1101254
so things like men having the right to kill their wives w/o repercussion for trivial reason for large parts of human history (or even currently in certain parts of the world) obviously isn't oppression

>>1101277
>[citation needed]

Dear feminist who goes into threads about women to start arguments with the largely misogynistic 4chan:
Go back to the kitchen.

>>1101284
http://www.stop-stoning.org/

>>1101291
>Implying that violence only happens to women
Get a better source (try one that isn't feminist propaganda).

>>1101291
>implying Jews and Muslims are humans

oh you

>>1101300
>implying that you don't know enough about the current state of the world or history to be worth talking to

>>1101319
>Implying that you do.
Considering your previous comments, the likely extent of your knowledge of history is the fiction that feminists have fed you over the years.

>>1101120

Agreed. People say here "it's because women want somewhere they can socialize lol", but professional predisposition predates awareness of what to expect inside the social setting of a university/career. If people (men and women) cared about what they'll do in life based solely on how good they'll fare with the opposite sex, you'd see nerds joining careers with loads of women, and viceversa.

>>1100382


>>implying that you wouldn't fuck that pretty, slightly chubby, busty chick from myth busters

>>1101452
Who implied that?

Because around about the time science starts becoming actual science in school is also about the time girls start becoming more interested in boys then school.

They get older and bounce back but by then the foundation science stuff is over and its just studying stuff, by then they're expertise in social graces pays off more then scientific prowess so it persists.

>>1101452
>Slightly chubby
Your artificial standards of beauty are showing.

Women have been historicly oppressed in the field of science with there ideas stolens and there discoveries shut down or ignored. E.g. Lisa Mitner

>>implying anyone who posted in this thread is actually a scientist
I am firmly convinced there is like 3 real scientists here, the rest are all creation 'scientists' and idiots/trolls

>>1100711
Very nice

>>1100382

>What's your hypothesis

Men <> Women

/thread

>>1102130

>3

Seriously?!

I never saw a real scientist on /sci/?!