/sci/ - Science & Math

Very informative read, thank you

Very informative read, fuck you

>>12521401
and the question is ?

>>12521401
So basically your saying that a trans man will never be a women no matter how much of their penis they cut off?

Very interesting. Facebook and Twitter tell me otherwise though. Is it possible those high standing institutions are lying to us? I wonder why they would do that........

>>12521401
Women should be homemakers. Women have been getting less happy both overall and relative to men since the 1970’s in the west.

>>12521550
this, don’t marry a woman unless she wants to be a homemaker.

>>12521401
Shut the fuck up fag. I would have sex with the woman in your pic.

>>12521569
>woman in your pic
anon I...

Women also have a larger pelvic hole thingy for the baby if you know what i mean

>>12521570
>I'm not attracted to something that looks like a woman
Said every fag ever.

>>12521588
>Imagine wanting to fuck a man
faggot

>>12521571
I don't know what you mean.

>>12521597
he’s talking about a urethra

>>“Throughout human history, traditional gender roles have often defined and limited women's activities and opportunities“

Careful with that, beyond the last 6000-8000 years we have basically zero proof of classical gender roles. Our “evidence“ is that, classical genderroles were a thing in for the last few thousand years in most civilizations. Though it wouldn't be implausable that during hunter gatherer times fit/healthy people would hunt, while only old people and visibly pregnant women would stay behind and look after the tribes offspring.

>>12521989
>careful with that

>>12521997
Damn, someone is easily offended

>>12521989
anthropology is super interesting, and it's interesting how everyone just assumes the eurocentric culture is just how everyone always is naturally.
There's all kinds of weird stuff in smaller indigenous tribes that were mostly wiped out by colonialism/imperialism. Things like polyandry being the norm, cultures with 3/4 genders, even people who were basically transgenders.

>>12522019

>>12521989
Men for instance were always the ones going to war, only a fucking retard would believe sending women to the battlefield is a good idea, and not even because women have less strenght that men but because women are ones who can give birth to children. You'd be effectively killing entire potential future populations by getting the women killed in wars.

>>12522072
Fuck off to /his/ with your pseud garbage. "Soft" sciences are not science at all. And whatever gender roles some backwards tribe had 800 years is a funny anecdote that you 2 dedicate seconds of attention at best.

>Omg there were trannies in this tribe in the Amazon
Nobody cares

>>12522106
>Nobody cares
you seem pretty butthurt about it.

>>12522138
Yea I'm asshurt about soft science tards ruining /sci/ and scientific institutions

>>12522172
human behavior is interesting, deal with it.

>>12522188
Ok so go to /his/ then, tard. History AND humanities.

>>12522096
Except it's hunting and not war. Apart from that, if you had a couple strong/skilled women why wouldn't you send them to war. You won't need every woman to assure persistance of the population. I also don't know why the strengh argument is so often brought up, its a rather weak argument imo (pun maybe intended). On average women do have less muscle mass and a lower percentage in muscle mass accounts for their total weight, but as far as i know that stats are from modern times and countries, so for most being muscular is more of a choice than a necessity. So under different circumstances this imbalance might be even less of an issue.
On top of that: If you ask any martial artist, they will happily tell you that pure strengh will only get you so far and technique and strategy will be much more effective.

>>12522072
it interesting uncovers stuff we europe and america used to hide from them selves. I like how during ancient roman times it was completely normal to have a gay lover and no one had an issue. Took us like 2000 years to get back to that point.

Do the world a favor OP, kill yourself.

>>12522172
why go to /his/ when /sci/ is always 25% humanities/psyc threads?

>>12522096
War is actually the exception rather than the rule in human society. Especially once you get out of the european bubble.

>>12521401

You will never be a real woman. You have no womb, you have no ovaries, you have no eggs. You are a homosexual man twisted by drugs and surgery into a crude mockery of nature’s perfection.

All the “validation” you get is two-faced and half-hearted. Behind your back people mock you. Your parents are disgusted and ashamed of you, your “friends” laugh at your ghoulish appearance behind closed doors.

Men are utterly repulsed by you. Thousands of years of evolution have allowed men to sniff out frauds with incredible efficiency. Even trannies who “pass” look uncanny and unnatural to a man. Your bone structure is a dead giveaway. And even if you manage to get a drunk guy home with you, he’ll turn tail and bolt the second he gets a whiff of your diseased, infected axe wound.

You will never be happy. You wrench out a fake smile every single morning and tell yourself it’s going to be ok, but deep inside you feel the depression creeping up like a weed, ready to crush you under the unbearable weight.

Eventually it’ll be too much to bear - you’ll buy a rope, tie a noose, put it around your neck, and plunge into the cold abyss. Your parents will find you, heartbroken but relieved that they no longer have to live with the unbearable shame and disappointment. They’ll bury you with a headstone marked with your birth name, and every passerby for the rest of eternity will know a man is buried there. Your body will decay and go back to the dust, and all that will remain of your legacy is a skeleton that is unmistakably male.

This is your fate. This is what you chose. There is no turning back.

>>12522224
>Especially once you get out of the european bubble.
I hope you are not implying here europe is the place the has the majority of wars in world history, the reason europe has so many wars is because europeans actually recorded and wrote about those wars unlike everywhere else on the planet which lacks writtings/recordings of everything in general, that's the reason and not because europe likes doing wars all the time just for the sake of it

>>12522202
> if you had a couple strong/skilled women why wouldn't you send them to war.
Sure agree but it simply never was the majority
>You won't need every woman to assure persistance of the population.
I think you really need to understand how low was the life expentancy of everyone in general for all of world history, just until over a century ago life expectancy was extremely low, thus absolutely every single woman was essential to allow persitance of a population, you couldn't allow yourself such luxuries, at least that's how I see it and I think it is very logical.
>I also don't know why the strengh argument is so often brought up
> If you ask any martial artist, they will happily tell you that pure strengh will only get you so far and technique and strategy will be much more effective.
There were no guns for most world history of course, just having more capacity for higher strenght was already a huge advantage over everyone else, to carry weapons, armors or whatever you need sufficient muscle for and the more you have the better, you could say better chances at beating who you were against, but yes I do accept there's exceptions. Not all men are the same nor all women are the same.

>>12521989
>Careful with that, beyond the last 6000-8000 years we have basically zero proof of classical gender roles

Except hunter-gatherers still exist and they usually are male-dominated with males hunting and warring and females foraging for berries and shit

>>12522202
>On average women do have less muscle mass and a lower percentage in muscle mass accounts for their total weight, but as far as i know that stats are from modern times and countries

Holy shit you’re dumb.

>>12522224
Wrong. War is the rule anywhere where resources were not remarkably plentiful.

>>12522283
Well i think it also might differ vastly on the time period. I never heard of future population count, as a concern during war (apart from food shortages) maybe i am missing out.
If were talking war in terms of two armys clashing together, then yes, manpower over skill probably. I was more concerned with 1v1 ish combat situations.

>>12522309
Very well. Tell me how then.

>>12521401

>>12522363
>Very well. Tell me how then.

hand grip strength

almost all men are stronger than almost all women

ten times the T level and single x chromosome (with its androgen sensitivity gene present in all cells instead of ~50% as with mosaic inactivation) among other things will do that.

>>12521561
>Work wageslave job
>Come home to homemaker wife
>She sat at home on tiktok all day
>House is a mess
>Let kids back in the house
>They track mud everywhere looks like they are feral
>Clean up the house
>Put frozen dinner in oven
>"Hey Anon, I've been talking to Chad on insta and hope you don't mind if he comes over tomorrow while you're at work. Oh is dinner ready?"
>Eat dinner alone at the kitchen table
>Put children to bed
>Read them a story, hoping they will learn to read one day
>Fall asleep to the sound of wife texting Chad
>Tomorrow's another day
>Good thing I married a homemaker, right guys?

>>12521597
>>12521612
No you fucking idiot, the urethra is a different hole from the birth canal, and also, he was probably talking about the bone structure of having "wide birthing hips".

>>12522283
It depends on the time period but women were more common in certain points of history on the battlefield. Aside from blunt weapons like maces, flails, clubs, and larger swords strength isn't really a factor in combat effectiveness. Almost every successful army had a strong preference for spears and bow and arrows which don't require a lot of strength to be effective.
I think it's also fair to point out that the only combat sport where a man and woman can fight one another is HEMA.

>>12522568
>spears and bow and arrows which don't require a lot of strength to be effective
Opinion discarded.

>>12522568
>and arrows which don't require a lot of strength to be effective.
Are you serious? Archers literally need a lot of fucking stenght my dude, that archers don't need strenght is a meme.

>>12521989
>we have basically zero proof of classical gender roles
HAHAHAHHAH
AAAAAAAAAA
AHAHAHAHAHHA
HAHAHAHAH!
good one, faggot

>>12521457
Are traps gay?

>>12522072
You know those tribes got rekt for a reason, right?

>>12522588
>>12522610
>Archers literally need a lot of fucking stenght my dude, that archers don't need strenght is a meme.
I worded that wrong fair enough, but a woman could feasibly be strong enough to be effective with those weapons as opposed to something like a mace or club or large sword.

>>12522568
Dude, skeletons of medieval English archers are literally deformed thanks to their profession. Longbows taken from the wreck of the Mary Rose were revealed to have a probable draw-weight of 120-150lbs. Grab a 75lb weight in each hand and pull them up to your chin; that's the effort it took to draw back a longbow.

>>12521989
> beyond the last 6000-8000 years
Literally everything that actually matters happened in that period. Who the fuck cares what cavemen half monkeys did.

>>12522568
Anon, I appreciate your passion, but don’t you feel like you’re really trying to stretch facts to fit your preconceived view of the world? Like, read back all the posts you wrote and try to reflect on them

>>12522658
No you didnt just word it badly.
You consistantly conflate whats feasable with whats probable.

>>12521401

>>12522525
But being a homemaker means cooking and cleaning, no?

>>12521401
Femine women have right to suck my dick, and trust me, man doesn't.

Transsexual man shouldn't be denied right to die and be reborn as woman, and we'll have only real woman not transsexual one, if you know what I mean.

Like: I got born with different body>KYS and you'll get a correct one.

>>12523024
Even I do think that encouraging those abnominations to commit suicide is safer than running sex coverting buisniss which can get out of hand like buisnisess got on usuall.

We can end up in society, when you'll be watched, and by your contribution to society you'll be forced into sex reassigment surgery, if you know how lobbyst work you know it's realistic.

Nobody wants to his balls to be cut off just because he's kindergarden teacher.

It can be worse than pharmacologist lobby.

Be aware.