/sci/ - Science & Math

Females bore more children then males this year.

Wasn't even close.

Produce milk.

>>6745571
Immune to testicular cancer, surprisingly.

>>6745571

More susceptible to X-linked genetic disease

Require significantly more food.

>>6745571
>Prove that males aren't

Interesting use of logic. You can only really prove positives, and you can't really prove that males are smarter because the nature versus nurture debate is live and well. And we don't understand brains enough to prove it neurologically either.

To prove that women are inferior you would have to control for all of the social aspects of how they are raised which is essentially impossible. As someone who has worked with children you can see how girls are basically given dolls and and guys are given cool shit to break and dissect and take apart and you see this throughout the gender's whole lifetimes, and it's easy to see which side of this would suit engineering and which side would suit social comprehension.

>>6745571

Every way? Well, we can define a genetic superiority metric as "having a vagina" and score people that have this trait with a 1 and those without with a 0. By this metric, males are not genetically superior to females.

Women perform better academically and are better at finding jobs. Women live longer than men. Women require less resources than men. Women are an order of magnitude less violent than men. Women engage in far less antisocial behavior in general.

So, that's a few ways.

Who would have known /sci/ is full of feminists?

>>6745618
you need to post a misogynistic thread to find out

>>6745571
Women are more bangable.

>>6745618

If the definition of a "feminist" is just anyone who questions OP's assertion, then only fucking idiots are not "feminists." Since not everyone on /sci/ is a fucking idiot, then "/sci/ is full of feminists."

>>6745621

I've noticed that on 4chan and Reddit recently, you only have to be moderately opposed to hating women in every way to be accused of being a full-blown SJW. Idunno if /pol/ is leaking or what.

>>6745623
The overreaction to SJWs is spread across multiple boards. Probably a huge chunk are from /v/

>>6745612
Why aren't cutie patooties leading the way in science and industry yet?

>>6745643

I don't envy any of my female colleagues seeking STEM degrees. Thier lives are basically half heavy condescension and dismissal, and half non-stop attention from white knights who won't stop bothering/distracting them.

Also, as >>6745602 pointed out, we just don't push women in that direction - from birth. We need to really restructure how education, especially early education, treats gender.

>>6745571
Checkmate, /sci/ists.
/pol/ians: 1 /sci/ists: 0

>>6745571
I agree with you,but still:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof

>>6745650
>being this delusional
/pol/acks gonna /pol/
>>>/pol/

>>6745649
I find the push for treating everyone the same kind of funny. A better strategy for restfructuring society would be recognizing that the sexes brains develop differently, studying the differences and applying them to education. And I don't mean in a "society makes girls love dolls and boys love trucks" I mean: the different hormone levels in a child affect the way their brains wire themselves throughout their lives.

>>6745612
>Women perform better academically and are better at finding jobs

They also have EEO laws that specifically give them such handicaps

>Women live longer than men

Men typically join more dangerous/hazardous fields such as military or deep sea fishing, leading to lower average lifespan

>Women require less resources than men

By what metric? Resource intake isn't as important as resource efficiency anyway.

>Women are an order of magnitude less violent than men

Citation needed. Domestic violence isn't reported/ taken seriously when women are perpetrators.

Declaring men or women are overall better is retarded, but these are some ill conceived talking points.

>>6745663

>would be recognizing that the sexes brains develop differently, studying the differences and applying them to education

The problem with this is that, so far, the average differences in between the two genders is smaller than the massive deviation of how brains develop within each gender. Gender just isn't a very useful tool to determine how a child's brain will develop. I agree with your general sentiment, but more at the individual level.

>>6745659
reddit, you are just as autistic as /pol/. Please fuck off and never come back.

>>6745671
>They also have EEO laws

Put in place because of discrimination in the first place. Don't get the cart before the horse.

>By what metric? Resource intake isn't as important as resource efficiency anyway.

Space programs have been singing about enjoying the resourcefulness of female astronauts. They require less food, space, and water to perform the same man-hours of work.

>Domestic violence isn't reported/ taken seriously when women are perpetrators.

Domestic violence isn't the only type of violence. They fight less in school, make up practically no gang violence, and rarely commit spree/serial killings.

>>6745671
>hurr durr nobody reports a murder if a woman does it

You are this retarded. Go back to /pol/ you faggot.

Is Testosterone the root of all problems afflicting mankinde?

Employer here. Women are better at following orders showing up on time, and being creative in the work environment than men by far I have found.

The main problem is they only really maintain these traits as long as they are alone or working under a man. The second you put like 3 or 4 of them all together with a female boss, everything goes to absolute shit.

>>6745708
Maybe it's just that the men who select women to promote to boss select them very poorly.

>>6745708

I remember reading about some experiments where mixed groups of men and women performed much better than groups of either all men or all women in a variety of tasks, especially high stress ones. But it was years ago and I can't seem to find it.

>>6745716

Anecdotally I can vouch for the stress part. Mixed environments are so much more chill. All of my boy's club jobs had me huffing and puffing and getting pissed all the time.

>>6745720
It must be our pheromones mixing to create a calming essence that permeates the office environment.

>>6745612
>women perform better academically

Yes, women are better at following instruction relating to prior work/discoveries without any input on their own. By your own admission. Kek.

Men have something 99% of women never have/had. Ambition to achieve the impossible.

Have a look at this handy chart, most females in college are there to do some low tier major.

Oh, by the way, lesbian couples have the highest domestic violence rate out off all other couples. . . . .

>>6745681
Lol, at my high school it seemed to me that pretty much every single fight was between two bitches over something superficial, pulling hair and pushing each other's heads into the ground over and over. I also went to a really ghetto school though. I'm a very fit person and always have been, but those girls could have easily kicked my ass, they were so experienced in fighting.

>>6745729

We get it, you hate women and you're very edgy.

>>6745729
>CompSci above 120

Confirmed for falsified test

>>6745729
>Men have something 99% of women never have/had. Ambition to achieve the impossible.

Redpill pls go

>>6745729
>Men have something 99% of women never have/had. Ambition to achieve the impossible.
So what great heights have you achieved anon?

I'm betting your life is more pathetically worthless than the average female's.

>>6745802

This seems to be a trend I've noticed among people who think that way. People who tie racism/sexism/etc into their central belief systems are invariably trying to tie themselves to a successful collective to compensate for their shortcomings as an individual.

>>6745612
>. Women engage in far less antisocial behavior in general.
You had me until this.
You either are a woman or have never met any.

>>6745817

according to pretty much all violent crime statistics, it's true.

>>6745898
Anti-social behaviours are actions that harm or lack consideration for the well-being of others.

Being the (physically) weaker sex, it makes sense that female antisocial behavior would be less physical.

I don't know if women actually exhibit more antisocial behavior than men, but I do know that "harm" and "well-being" are ambiguous terms that seem to expand alongside cultural marxism. If general cattiness could be antisocial behavior the other poster may have a point.

Women are retarded.
I don't know what it is, I can't prove it but they're all retarded.
Like, every single one.
Just pisses me off when they try to act intelligent and shit, I don't know, they just do it wrong.
Girls should wear frilly dresses and have good manners and be caring and gentle, these are the best traits a woman can have and I think any woman having them is to me one of the most beautiful things in the world, and I cannot see why women do not strive to preserve this beauty, but instead zealously pursue masculine traits and then claim they are doing it "for women."
What we see with feminism is a destruction of the woman.

>>6745909
>I don't know what it is, I can't prove it but they're all retarded.

You have literally been brainwashed.

You think something and don't know why, but you accept it as a definite truth. I'm not saying you're stupid but some influential figure got to you early or in a critical time in your life and put serious blinders on your entire thought process.

What else do you think about women--would you care to open up? I'm here to listen.

>>6745681
Women were discriminated against because they couldn't do difficult jobs.

Female bodies cannot take the beating that a male body can. They are much more fragile and men are the best astronauts because of this. Think about body size and radiation. http://www.space.com/22252-women-astronauts-radiation-risk.html

>Women fight less.
That is cute. Citation needed, my friend. Women typically gravitate towards less detectable means of murder, such as poison and angel-of-death murders.

>>6745922
You've seriously misinterpreted "I don't know what it is."
Specifically, it's the way they act, but I cannot pinpoint exactly one thing they do which makes me feel this way, because it is everything they do.

You were assuming that I had some innate hatred for women despite them never doing anything wrong, and not knowing why.
But lets assume the latter case is true, who has brainwashed me?
The brainwashing is in favor of the progressive feminist cult, not contrary to it.
And if by that you meant simply that I have for artificial reasons come to believe that women should act a certain way, then I should ask you, is that wrong of me, should a man not be strong, and should a woman not be caring?
Shall we just do away with this "brainwashing" that we have apparently been doing for thousands of years and adopt the clearly superior system of gender agnosticism?
And before you call me a misogynist let me tell you that, outside of your little circle of self-imposed downtrodden there are women everywhere, some of which I know in real life, that agree with me completely.

Why are they called "woman" in the first place?

>>6745909
Supreme gentleman spotted

>>6745978
>Specifically, it's the way they act, but I cannot pinpoint exactly one thing they do which makes me feel this way, because it is everything they do
This is not specific, nor is it galvanizing.

>You were assuming that I had some innate hatred for women despite them never doing anything wrong, and not knowing why.
This is pure projection. Feel free to re-read my post.

>The brainwashing is in favor of the progressive feminist cult, not contrary to it.
How so?

>And if by that you meant simply that I have for artificial reasons come to believe that women should act a certain way, then I should ask you, is that wrong of me, should a man not be strong, and should a woman not be caring?
Personally, I believe men and women should be strong and caring.

>Shall we just do away with this "brainwashing" that we have apparently been doing for thousands of years and adopt the clearly superior system of gender agnosticism?
Who is "we"? I doubt either of our countries have been around for millenia as they are now, and there have been many cultures in which women are/were not regarded as "all retarded."

>And before you call me a misogynist let me tell you that, outside of your little circle of self-imposed downtrodden there are women everywhere, some of which I know in real life, that agree with me completely.
There are also female PhDs.

I recommend psychedelics, an ego death would do you good.

>>6745992
Ancient Celtic word innit??

>>6745909
is this copied fettuccine?

>>6745909
r/redpill pls go

>>6746060
This is exactly what you would see in the "debate" section of a random forum populated by pimple-faced teenagers, congratulations.
It's so cute I think I'll even play along.

>This is not specific, nor is it galvanizing.
So what?

>This is pure projection. Feel free to re-read my post.
"You think something and don't know why"
Which means:
"I think women are retarded and don't know why."
But I am in fact basing my feelings on my daily interactions with women, in and out of the workplace.

>How so?
I honestly don't know how to explain this one, it's all over mainstream media outlets, you can't possibly miss it.

>Personally, I believe men and women should be strong and caring.
But why do you think that?
I'm pretty caring, but that's my business, and I don't go around starting movements to make men more caring.

>Who is "we"? I doubt either of our countries have been around for millenia as they are now, and there have been many cultures in which women are/were not regarded as "all retarded."
Okay then let's restrict it to the whole of western civilization for the past 2014 years :^)

>There are also female PhDs.
You have obviously never met any because they're obnoxious and they put in no real effort, 99% of them don't do anything with their education except get a job and then quit or get fired.
I remember my CS classes, holy shit, all of the women were doing html/css going around like they're some kind of academic tycoons ready to work as an unpaid intern.

Who would be easier to brainwash than somebody with no ego.

>>6746187
>my CS classes
lol

>>6745571
tits

>>6746226
Why do women covered in oil look sexier than women no covered in oil?

>>6746230
I don't know.

>>6745701
>domestic violence == murder

I'm just going to leave this here.

>>6746187
>So what?
If it's not specific, you can't begin with "specifically."

>But I am in fact basing my feelings on my daily interactions with women, in and out of the workplace.
You've stated that you react to actions with feelings. You've shown no understanding as of why.

>I honestly don't know how to explain this one, it's all over mainstream media outlets, you can't possibly miss it.
It's not a positive brainwashing to positivity if it makes you think negatively of a subject.

>But why do you think that?
A high parental investment has been crucial to the evolution of our species to what it is today, as well as physical and mental toughness.

>Okay then let's restrict it to the whole of western civilization for the past 2014 years :^)
"Western civilization" hasn't existed for 2014 years. American Indians certainly didn't believe that women were "all retarded."

You have obviously never met any because they're obnoxious and they put in no real effort, 99% of them don't do anything with their education except get a job and then quit or get fired.
This is just obscene.

>Who would be easier to brainwash than somebody with no ego
Someone with an ego that can be caressed with affirmation, circle jerks, and "feelings."

>>6746187
>>So what?
>If it's not specific, you can't begin with "specifically."
>>But I am in fact basing my feelings on my daily interactions with women, in and out of the workplace.
>You've stated that you react to actions with feelings. You've shown no understanding as of why.
>>I honestly don't know how to explain this one, it's all over mainstream media outlets, you can't possibly miss it.
>It's not a positive brainwashing to positivity if it makes you think negatively of a subject.
>>But why do you think that?
>A high parental investment has been crucial to the evolution of our species to what it is today, as well as physical and mental toughness.
>>Okay then let's restrict it to the whole of western civilization for the past 2014 years :^)
>"Western civilization" hasn't existed for 2014 years. American Indians certainly didn't believe that women were "all retarded."

>You have obviously never met any because they're obnoxious and they put in no real effort, 99% of them don't do anything with their education except get a job and then quit or get fired.
This is just obscene.


>>Who would be easier to brainwash than somebody with no ego
>Someone with an ego that can be caressed with affirmation, circle jerks, and "feelings."


By the way, thanks for satirizing your shitty argument so I don't have to.

>>6745704
no, it is the essence of the gods

>>6745907
>it makes sense that female antisocial behavior would be less physical
bullshit, i have been hit by girls a lot more time i have hit girls back, the main reason behind this is i would only need to hit once, then ambulance time, while they can repeatedly pummel me and i could even turn around for a back rub if they are really at it.

women are a lot less reserved with their abuse imho because they never learned (or had to learn) to check their impulses. also "bitches be crazy"

>>6746323
>essence of gods
>makes us fighty
>makes us rapey
>makes us mad
It's the worst.

>>6745681
>They also have EEO laws
> .. Put in place because of discrimination in the first place. Don't get the cart before the horse.

It doesn't matter why they were put in place, the fact that they're there, skewing the balance at this present moment towards their favor, matters. This isn't a moral debate, or at least it shouldn't be. It should be unbiased comparison between the two sexes (granted, like that's ever happened with bitter "so roneries" on one side and white knights and feminists on the other).

>>6745934
>Women were discriminated against because they couldn't do difficult jobs.
What the flying fuck are you talking about. The correlation is far more likely to be found with primitive culture and technology, placing the most power in the hands of the most physically violent and powerful.

Namely, women were discriminated because they COULD be, because people were even more stupid then than they are now, and controlled with fists and spears rather than their brains.

In the modern world, one's physique is practically useless aside from appearance and hobbies, unless you're doing grunt work. Now it's all about mental ability and social skills.

I will say this, I fucking hate that even in this day, we can never have unbiased discussions about anything. Males are larger, stronger, recuperate faster, and physically develop faster under duress than females thanks to a variety of hormones. It's stupid to argue against that, even though so many do.

The point here is that it doesn't matter. Those attributes are all but useless in modern day world.

Also, once you start viewing women as something else than just some hole and titties you'd like to bang, you might see that they're actually not all that different from males. Different methods, but pretty much exactly the same end results. There are useless, fucking annoying waste of oxygen in women, as well as men, too.

>>6745594
>>6745571
Eg Color-Blindness