/sci/ - Science & Math

Vapid looks are sexy.

Intelligent girls are threatening, kill boners.

Evolution favors stupid expressions.

The dominance of cold rationality and logical thought process is often associated with intelligence.

Women are more emotional than men (on average), therefore we innately associate women with less intelligence based upon life experience fortifying our belief.

Much like how you are wary around an African American that is clothed as a hoodlum.

>>1858406

Bullshit evolutionary explanation.

They look unintelligent, because they are unintelligent. Look at the list of smartest 1000 scientists who have changed history, and less than 1 percent will be female.

>>1858406
>Vapid looks are sexy.

So that's why all the porn models (especially Asian) strive to look as retardedly innocent/devoid of any intelligent thought as possible.

>>1858389

They don't just look unintelligent. They are unintelligent. Women only exist to take care of offspring. Men do all the work and intelligent thinking meant to further the human race.

>>1858412
You could have just said "only 10 will be female", instead of looking like a pseudo-intelligent 15 year old high schooler.

>>1858418

What's the difference?

>>1858428
One makes you look like a pseudo-intelligent 15 year old high schooler and the other doesn't.

>>1858418
That would mean "1 percent will be female". He said "less than 1 percent will be female", meaning between 9 or 0.

>>1858430

I wasn't the one who made that comment, just pointing out your bias in semantics that instead makes you look like an unintelligent 15 year old.

>>1858411
The average IQ for women is only slightly lower than for me, but their bell curve isn't as wide. There are more intelligent men than intelligent women, there are more stupid men than stupid women, there are more average women than average men. This means that if you pick out a group intelligent people they will mostly be men and the women in the group will probably not be among the most intelligent. If you pick out a group of stupid people they will mostly be men and the women will probably not be the most stupid.

>>1858428
If your selection is an whole number of great scientists, the amount of females should also be a whole number. Using estimation phrases like "less than one percent" would be better suited for estimated/fuzzy figures.

But they're basically the same thing and >>1858418 is just being a pedantic faggot.

>>1858428
If your selection is a whole number of great scientists, the amount of females should also be a whole number. Using estimation phrases like "less than one percent" would be better suited for estimated/fuzzy figures.

But they're basically the same thing and >>1858418 is just being a pedantic faggot.

because we are

>>1858434
You're being dumb. It's not hard to observe someone trying to sound smart. You'd use "1%" if it's some unspecific number. But you had 1000. And you said 1%. Like are you fucking dumb and you can't figure out that 10 is 1% of 1000?

And you are that same person. I can report both of your posts and it will tell me that I can't report more than one from the same IP. Don't bullshit.

i like the unoriginality in your burn though, makes you sound like the pseudo-intellectual i was calling you before for making a stupid remark

>>1858485

>>1858485

Why do you keep saying "you"? I'm not the same person, but believe what you want. Also learn how report works.