/sci/ - Science & Math

bump

>Being unproductive in society makes you inferior
Excuse me what?
I'm going to need some sources.

children who spend more time with their mother have been shown to have better decision making skills and better control over their actions, so wouldn't lesbians be a better choice than homosexual males? (dont ask for a source i cant remember and im not looking for it now)

>>4961664
Unproductive members of society aren't as useful as productive ones. The word unproductive, by definition, refers to an inferiority, in regards to productivity, to the productive.

Do you even Ayn Rand?

>>4961668
>>4961668
>>4961668

No source

We don't care

>>4961674
Same applies to OP. No one should even care as it is, all I see is unfounded claims.

>>4961693
My claims (OP here) are completely scientifical and logic. No evidence needed for semantics.

>>4961702
>Now look at all the fatherless children in the world. They inevitably are very likely to be unproductive and inferior members of society. Not that they can't be, just scientifically and statistically they most often won't be.
[citation needed]

>Now look at all the fatherless children in the world. They inevitably are very likely to be unproductive and inferior members of society. Not that they can't be, just scientifically and statistically they most often won't be.
I saw a paper about that long ago, but the same problems were seen in children raised by single males. It was more of a "only one parent isn't enough" rather than women suck
anyway, I don't even remember where did I saw it, not that I have anything to do with this stuff anyway

>>4961670

>Ayn Rand
No. I don't, and I'm proud of that.

>>4961702
>Science board
>No evidence needed

Go back to /x/

>>4961702
>my claims are completely scientifical and logic so no evidence is needed

>>4961702
is this new? it's funny either way

>>4961670
>Ayn Rand
9/10 because it was pretty subtle until this statement.

>>4961803
This is one of the best images I've ever seen on 4chan.

>>4961870
if it's so great how come he's dead?

Men and women fulfill different roles in society and in a child's life, it's that simple. It's not a question of inferiority vs superiority, a child raised by homosexual parents of either sex will probably have more psychological and adjustment problems than one raised in a stable home environment with heterosexual parents (on average). Though the nature of lesbian vs gay parent problems may be different

>>4961901
I would like to say that, politically, I think any responsible should be allowed to raise kids if they want to.

Here OP, have some knowledge from /a/

>>4961925
oops

Until very recently, the nuclear family didn't exist. Children were raised by an extended family that often included people who weren't even related to them.

Children also often didn't come to know their father very well until they'd gotten past the age of infant mortality, this was to spare him the pain of losing them.

Given how this has been the case for the vast majority of history, I think that human psychology is able to deal with it. Fatherless children are probably more prone to crime for other reasons which cause the break up of the family in the first place.

Very simply, the notion that the nuclear family is natural is a lie. It's a very new concept, just like marrying for love.

>>4961929

That'd work unless the child was a minority. Then every other race would make a point not to help him, I would think.

>>4961941

Your post makes me sad.

OP is not doing it right. Relying on only data about fatherless children doing worse, not checking whether it might just be that it is the poor genetic quality of women who end up alone that causes problems, not the lack of a father.

more likely to commit crime you say?

women behave terribly. think back to the last time a hot babe threw a childish tantrum. screaming and crying in front of everyone. no one cares, it's just expected that women behave that way. but we don't put up with it when men act so childishly.

anyways society lets women act like children. which is why most of them have the mentality of such. 2 women on their own raising a child, how is that child going to know how to behave when he is being raised by children himself?

gonna grow up to be a dramaqueen without a father figure. and there are 2 kinds of male dramaqueen, the effeminate whining loser, and the dangerous ragesmash man-child. both suck.

>>4961941
>Until very recently, the nuclear family didn't exist.

fucking thank you. when so many all do one thing for generations we tend to think its "natural". but we haven't had "nuclear families" long enough to even adapt to them through natural selection.

there is very little in our instinctual mental toolkit to cope with these unnatural relationships. which would explain why most of these nuclear families undergo intense drama and usually fall apart.

i'm not saying the natural way of an entire tribe raising it's children together is better but... oh wait i am

>>4962010
imagine one black guy in the neighborhood and then half the trough children come out black...

i'm not going anywhere with this, just imagine his face when

>>4962297
wow
adult children by lesbian couple are apparently rape magnets

what's up with that

>>4962315
probably a bit biased. it also doesn't seem to take notice of the problems surrounding growing up with gay parents where it has nothing to do with the parents at all but with how the public, societal environment views and treat you.
plus the parents also have it hard.