Girls doing better than boys

[Anonymous No.10273169]

Girls do better in all subjects.
The future is female.
However females don't take risks. This will result in mostly average and smart female skilled employees with mostly smart male employers.
The average males become criminals, hobos and gamers.
This is the future because girls are better at studying on average in all cases.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/girls-get-better-grades-boys-even-stem-subjects-study-finds-n912891

[Anonymous No.10273177]

pervy uncle helps with her algebra

[Anonymous No.10273191]

>>10273169
girls do better in school as they hit puberty earlier and maturity younger than boys

at college age males dominate women in stem

[Anonymous No.10273192]

>>10273169
Porn, vidya and alcohol will be the end of man

[Anonymous No.10273199]

>>10273169
Then why are 99% of all scientists, innovators, philosophers, and statesmens male?

Why are trans women more competent than real women?

[Anonymous No.10273201]

>>10273199
Because real women haven't had a chance to asset their total dominance yet.

[Anonymous No.10273202]

>>10273169
>“Simulations of these differences suggest the top 10 percent of a class contains equal numbers of girls and boys in STEM, but more girls in non-STEM subjects,” they added.
The results are actually less conclusive than they sound. But I’ll be on the lookout for any qt genius STEM girls.

[Anonymous No.10273203]

>>10273201
Then why does my statement still hold true when you only look at the past 50 years?

[Anonymous No.10273205]

>>10273203
It's gonna take a little more time.
Besides I already said the innovators are gonna stay men because men take more risks and think outside the box.
The average skilled labour office worker will be female not male. Those jobs are gonna be taken up by females. Men will become lower beings.

[Anonymous No.10273206]

>>10273205
>females will replace normies
I'm ok with this
t. high IQ gay guy

[Anonymous No.10273209]

Wait guys, is it actually a myth that boys are better at math than girls? I thought that was a biological fact or something.

[Anonymous No.10273210]

>>10273209
men are good at logic critical thinking and problem solving
women are good at emotions and shit

[Anonymous No.10273212]

That's really funny OP, made my day.

[Anonymous No.10273225]

>>10273169
Women suffer less from the consequences of sexual excess. Men have high prolactin and a stronger urge to procreate. Losing semen is worse for a man than a woman menstruating.
A woman cannot compete against a completely chaste man.

[Anonymous No.10273234]

>>10273225
So fapping bad?

[Anonymous No.10273239]

>>10273192
and anime

[Anonymous No.10273244]

There are various reasons for why this is happening.
1. Girls mature faster so they natural do better up till the first couple of years of undergrad.
2. Girls have to go to college because there are no trades route for girls. Lots of guys decide against going to uni so they have less incentive to give a shit about school.
3. Girls suffer less from certain kinds of developmental mental illnesses.
4. Girls have more support during their teenage phase. Unruly guys get told to fuck off.

[Anonymous No.10273300]

Getting better grades directly correlates with taking fewer risks. Women are worthless in STEM

[Anonymous No.10273310]

>>10273201

its coming, prepare your anusses, for mindless braindead studies, and non sense theories that make no sense and nobody will opppose becaues they are faraid of being labelled sexist

[Anonymous No.10273313]

>>10273205
>innovators of society are still gonna be men
>men will become lower beings
>innovators will become lower beings
nice logic there fella

[Anonymous No.10273345]

>>10273234
Fapping bad.
If you're not #monkmode, you're a brainlet.

[Anonymous No.10273350]

>>10273234
Yes.

[Anonymous No.10273360]

>>10273169
>The future is female.
No the future is nigger.

[Anonymous No.10273363]

>>10273169
They only do better in the grades that the teachers can input their bias into, boys do a little better on tests.

[Anonymous No.10273375]

>>10273313
he means the average male will have lower status than the average female but the truly great people will still be males

[Anonymous No.10273386]

>>10273244
>Girls have more support during their teenage phase. Unruly guys get told to fuck off.
Not exactly true. The support is there. Guys are just more hesitant to seek mental health assistance in the fear of being labelled a weak person, being emotional, unable to handle stress, etc. It's only when the kid starts doing stupid shit like taking anger out through severe bullying or becoming a suicidal, self-injuring loner when their friends and adults step in. It's considered normal for girls to get support, early too, solely because they are girls.
I'm a student in clinical psychology doing a small internship at a high school right now. High school kids are horrible. Would not recommend going into pediatric clinical psychology at all.

[Anonymous No.10273412]

>>10273375
that's already the case though

[Anonymous No.10273414]

>>10273386
what's wrong with highschool kids anon?

[Anonymous No.10273436]

>>10273414
Not him but I'd probably punch my 16 year old self if I was forced to spend a day with him.

[Anonymous No.10273438]

>>10273414
They're immature brats to be frank. Well, not so much the senior students, but the 12-16 age group. High-school here is grades 7-11. They think the world revolves around them, act like know-it-alls about every little fucking thing. They're selfish. They always want to be right and want to argue with you. Shit, I sound like a boomer.
Plus the stuff they've come to see me and my supervisor for are stupid.

[Anonymous No.10273449]

>>10273199
>Then why are 99% of all scientists, innovators, philosophers, and statesmens male?

THE EXPLANATION IS SIMPLE:

1) FOR INNOVATORS, BUSINESS PEOPLE AND SUCH. IT IS BECAUSE MEN SEXUAL OPPORTUNITIES IMPROVES A LOT WITH MONEY/GOOD CAREER/POWER. SO SOME GUYS WILL DEDICATE MOST OF HIS TIME TO ACCUMULATE WEALTH/POWER/STATUS SO THEY CAN GET BETTER WOMEN.

THIS DOESN'T APPLY TO WOMEN, BECAUSE THEIR SEXUAL OPPORTUNITIES AREN'T REALLY AFFECTED BY WEALTH/POWER/STATUS BUT BY THEIR LOOKS.

2) PHILOSOPHERS, TOP SCIENTISTS AND SUCH, THEY ARE COPING INCELS WITH LOTS OF FREE TIME. THERE ARE NO FEMALE INCELS SO OF COURSE THERE ARE FEW WOMEN ON SUCH POSITIONS.

[Anonymous No.10273456]

>>10273438
>Shit, I sound like a boomer.
The thing most people don't realize is that every generation is a little better and smarter than the last but young people are and always will think they are the hot shit center of the universe and be in actuality embarrassing and dumb as hell.

[Anonymous No.10273458]

All these statistics about women being smarter and getting better grades but still the top student in almost any field are still men. My university has a 65:35 female-to-male ratio but the all time top student was a guy from the physics department. Why is it that even under societal pressures (being called a nerd/weak/awkward/virgin/incel) some men just say fuck it and give it their all in their study or work? Women have all these programmes and scholarships to "empower" them but still gets absolutely outclassed by some pasty white kid that probably has only his mom to motivate him.

[Anonymous No.10273463]

>>10273449

>IT IS BECAUSE MEN SEXUAL OPPORTUNITIES IMPROVES A LOT WITH MONEY/GOOD CAREER/POWER. SO SOME GUYS WILL DEDICATE MOST OF HIS TIME TO ACCUMULATE WEALTH/POWER/STATUS SO THEY CAN GET BETTER WOMEN.

If you include the general social aspect and family too this is basically the best answer. The fact is Men take on more risk because more reward is eventually involved. Even something as simple as taking on more tasks that consume more time is something men are more likely to sign up for. Perhaps it's because men are optimistic (or opportunistic) fools we willing engage dick measuring contests that corporate employers love to exploit.

[Anonymous No.10273466]

>>10273458
>outclassed by some pasty white kid that probably has only his mom to motivate him.

OF COURSE. SEE >>10273449

IF THAT GUY DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING GOING IN HIS LIFE HE MAY DEDICATE ALL HIS TIME TO STUDY. ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO PUT LOTS OF HOURS INTO SOMETHING GET TO THE TOP. ITS NOT ONLY ABOUT BEING SMART, ITS ABOUT PUTTING THE TIME.

MOST GIRLS ACTUALLY HAVE MORE IMPORTANT/FUN THINGS TO CARE THAN STUDYING ALL DAY TO GET GOOD GRADES LMAO. THE ONES WITHOUT ANYTHING IN THEIR LIFES ARE 99% TIMES MEN, SO SOME OF THEM THEY PUT THE DEDICATION.

COPE ALL YOU WANT BUT YOU KNOW ITS TRUE.

[Anonymous No.10273471]

>>10273466
>ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO PUT LOTS OF HOURS INTO SOMETHING GET TO THE TOP
Yes of course

> ITS NOT ONLY ABOUT BEING SMART, ITS ABOUT PUTTING THE TIME.
Debatable

>MOST GIRLS ACTUALLY HAVE MORE IMPORTANT/FUN THINGS TO CARE THAN STUDYING ALL DAY TO GET GOOD GRADES LMAO
Like what?

>THE ONES WITHOUT ANYTHING IN THEIR LIFES ARE 99% TIMES MEN, SO SOME OF THEM THEY PUT THE DEDICATION.
Proving my point that even under hardships, some men still have the will and dedication to be the best

>COPE ALL YOU WANT
You are the one coping.

[Anonymous No.10273486]

>>10273471
>>ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO PUT LOTS OF HOURS INTO SOMETHING GET TO THE TOP
>Yes of course

>> ITS NOT ONLY ABOUT BEING SMART, ITS ABOUT PUTTING THE TIME.
>Debatable

WHAT THE FUCK NIGGER. YOU FIRST ACCEPT THAT YOU NEED TO PUT LOTS OF HOURS TO GET TO THE TOP AND NEXT YOU SAY THAT THE EXACT SAME THING IS DEBATABLE. STOP CONTRADICTING YOURSELF.


>>MOST GIRLS ACTUALLY HAVE MORE IMPORTANT/FUN THINGS TO CARE THAN STUDYING ALL DAY TO GET GOOD GRADES LMAO
>Like what?

SOCIAL LIFE. THE THING THAT THE "pasty white kid that probably has only his mom to motivate him" DOESNT HAVE

>>THE ONES WITHOUT ANYTHING IN THEIR LIFES ARE 99% TIMES MEN, SO SOME OF THEM THEY PUT THE DEDICATION.
>Proving my point that even under hardships, some men still have the will and dedication to be the best

EXACTLY WHAT IM SAYING, IM JUST POINTING OUT THE REASON. IT IS BECAUSE THEY DONT HAVE OTHER THINGS IN THEIR LIFE. AND SOME OF THEM THINK THAT DEDICATION WILL IMPROVE THEIR LIFES LOL

[Anonymous No.10273491]

If girls are so smart why haven't they accomplished anything. You wanna know why. Cuz all man are rapists and sexist. No evidence needed, just expectation

[Anonymous No.10273495]

>>10273458
what kind of clown college do you go to that reports their 'top student'? if you're deriving that from a list of nobel laureates - keep in mind that most of them are 65+. they went to college 45 years ago when women were either forbidden or strongly-dissuaded from pursuing STEM

grades alone aren't even a real accomplishment - your GPA is a give-a-shit benchmark for grad and/or medical school applications. alone, it means nothing.

also
>being called a nerd/weak/awkward/virgin/incel
>still gets absolutely outclassed by some pasty white kid that probably has only his mom to motivate him.

you are projecting

[Anonymous No.10273496]

>>10273486
>STOP CONTRADICTING YOURSELF.
Those two statements are not the exact same thing brainlet

>SOCIAL LIFE
Proving my point yet again that even under hardships (no social life/social anxiety etc) men still have the will and dedication to be the best

>ND SOME OF THEM THINK THAT DEDICATION WILL IMPROVE THEIR LIFES LOL
It most definitely will

Cope harder whore

[Anonymous No.10273498]

>>10273495
>you are projecting
I'm married and not even white

[Anonymous No.10273501]

>>10273498
you write things that sound a lot like they came from a pasty-ass lonely white kid

[Anonymous No.10273502]

Can y'all stop the yelling in this thread? We can hear it from >>10268286 and I'm afraid of what >>10271770 might do.

[Anonymous No.10273503]

>>10273501
So?

[Anonymous No.10273506]

>>10273486
>>10273466
>>10273449

If you're going to be an autist that writes with caps lock on, you should know that <50% of people will actually bother to read your bullshit. Lowercase text is typeset to be easier to read, and making your letters 2x bigger only confers stupidity, not importance or urgency.

[Anonymous No.10273507]

>>10273496
>Those two statements are not the exact same thing brainlet

YES THEY ARE CURRY NIGGER.


>Proving my point yet again that even under hardships (no social life/social anxiety etc) men still have the will and dedication to be the best
CANT YOU READ MY MAN? YES THEY DO I AGREE WITH YOU. BUT THEY DO BECAUSE THEY DONT HAVE ANY OTHER THING IN THEIR LIFES. DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW. I REPEAT. THEY HAVE THE DEDICATION BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO SOCIAL LIFE. IF THEY HAD A SOCIAL LIFE THEY WOULDNT PUT THE TIME. ALMOST NO GIRL IS IN THAT SITUATION (NO SOCIAL LIFE) SO THEY DONT PUT THE TIME. ITS NOT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND CURRY NIGGER.

>>ND SOME OF THEM THINK THAT DEDICATION WILL IMPROVE THEIR LIFES LOL
>It most definitely will

KEEP COPING. WHEN YOU HIT 30 YOU WILL STILL BE AN UGLY NON-NT INDIAN WITH NO SOCIAL LIFE AND YOU WILL GET BORED OF YOUR ACADEMIA COPES. THEN YOU WILL REMEMBER WHAT THIS CAPSLOCK ANON TOLD YOU.

SCREENCAP MY POSTS AND READ THEM IN 10 YEARS, YOU WILL CRY.

[Anonymous No.10273513]

>>10273507
>CURRY NIGGER
I'm not even Indian.

>SCREENCAP MY POSTS AND READ THEM IN 10 YEARS, YOU WILL CRY.
No I won't. Cope harder sθyboy.

[Anonymous No.10273522]

>>10273513
WHERE AM I COPING LMAO. YOU ARE THE PROJECTING INCEL

[Anonymous No.10273528]

>>10273522
>The best guy only made it because he has no social life

That is your cope sθyboy

[Anonymous No.10273534]

>>10273528
THEN EXPLAIN THE CORRELATION BETWEEN BEING A TOP STUDENT AND BEING UNATTRACTIVE LMAO.

LITERALLY NEVER SAW A GOOD LOOKING GUY ("CHAD", AS YOU CALL THEM) BEING AT THE TOP, SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE BETTER THINGS TO DO. MEANWHILE, HUNDREDS OF UGLY MEN OCCUPY THOSE SPOTS

[Anonymous No.10273539]

>>10273169
>Given every sociopolitical crutch imaginable just to even the playing field
>”HA! I’m beating you!”

[Anonymous No.10273542]

If any of this holds true. It just shows what a generation of nurturing girls and neglecting boys has wrought. As society has assumed that girls need the extra nurturing to succeed. While boys will just succeed on their own.

[Anonymous No.10273545]

>>10273534
Lmao, a ton of the good looking people were also the top of the class. You never saw them because of your tunnel vision, cope harder.

[Anonymous No.10273555]

>>10273169

Would anyone be surprised how easy it is for teenage girls to fit in because they have a new moist vagina? Can you see how this would help their grades when they get all the positive attention from their teachers in school?

We don't need to make the workplace into a harem. Men need purpose and they won't find it if you replace them with a bunch of women. We need to fix shit. Women sit around and don't do as much innovative or problem solving work. Especially women once they hit middle age. You're investing a lot of time and money into women that will give up and have a baby once they are 30. This is stupid. Its ignoring men. No wonder they are watching porn and playing video games. You're going to replace the only purpose they have with NPC women that aren't as adept as men in fixing things and progressing society. They will get fat and take up time though. If you keep pushing women into men's roles you're going to get a lot of Elizabeth Holmes types also.

[Anonymous No.10273557]

>>10273545
hot people are never top of their class in hard science or mathematics. you may see hot biochem or eng fags and occassionally csniggers but you’ll never see an 8/10+ Math or Phys genius at an elite uni, or it will be a freak occurrence. The entire nobel prize list and faculty lists and almost any top ranked uni evidence this. Cope harder, brainlet

[Anonymous No.10273562]

>>10273545
THIS IS BULLSHIT. ON LARGE CLASSES THE TOP PEOPLE ARE 99% TIMES UGLY MEN. THE DEDICATED ONES ARE ALSO UGLY MEN MOSTLY. THIS CORRELATION IS NOT BY CHANCE.

[Anonymous No.10273565]

>>10273169
Current year school is completely feminized and favors complete retards instead of people with actual abilities (because we are all equal and stuff and so you can't have someone falling behind, as long as that someone isn't a straight white male). As a result girls do better than boys. You should also consider that many projects and encouragements are female-only.
This isn't an increase in female intelligence (which remains scarily low), but only in the way it is measured, so you won't get more skilled female employees than you have now. Their number is already lower than what feminist media and governments say, since they measure them in the same biased way they measure female in school, inflating the number .

[Anonymous No.10273572]

>>10273562
>>10273557
My graduating year our straight A valedictorian was a solid 9 and mad yoked maybe you should get your eyes checked or go to a better university.

t. mech-engi

[Anonymous No.10273576]

>>10273169
>They used a new technique for meta-analysis — a study of studies that crunched the numbers in a novel way.
They manipulated data to make it say what they want.

They should have looked at who the top performers in STEM industries are.
If women are doing better in the classroom but worse on the job, it suggests classroom performance is not a good indicator of success.

Maybe the quality selection processes of our systems are being circumvented by better fakers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vavilovian_mimicry

[Anonymous No.10273586]

>>10273555
>Women sit around and don't do as much innovative or problem solving work.
>Its ignoring men. No wonder they are watching porn and playing video games

density status: neutron-star tier

[Anonymous No.10273607]

>>10273169
>Averages

When will these retards realize that "average" marks aren't good enough to become a STEM professional. Look at the upper ends of the spectrum. Interview the engineering students and find out for yourself that most females do in fact struggle to keep up despite amazing academic performance in high-school while most boys party or do some sport most of time and still get better STEM grades.

There is no discussion here worth having as the admission rates is already 55-60% female with most universities forcing a 51% minimum female quota, and yet the freshman dropout rate for females is such that classes are 70-80% male by the second semester.

In particular in our freshman ChemE lass we had 180 incoming females and 150 males, only 20 females and over 100 males got exam entrance for ChemE 101 (literally just setting up mass balances with different units was too abstract for most people with perfect high school GPAs and good SATs to handle; there is literally only one equation you need to memorize in the entire module (IN=OUT) and most people can't apply that).

[Anonymous No.10273611]

>>10273169
Wow. It's almost as if the real sex difference driving differential outcomes for the majority of men and women is intrinsic differences in motivation and goal-directed behavior. It's almost as if they both want the same thing, except one has to work a lot harder to get it. I wonder what that could fucking be?

[Anonymous No.10273619]

>>10273611
Women are statistically more agreeable and neurotic than men. Do you know what agreeable, neurotic people do? They worry about their problems more than average while assuming other people have the solutions they don't. Name an entrepreneur or intellectual visionary who has ever possessed these traits. I'm in a STEM PhD program with a lot of women who are smarter than most men. They also worry a shitload and want to be led like cattle. You do the math. Intelligence isn't the issue.

[Anonymous No.10273633]

>>10273169
Wow, it's almost like the more disagreeable sex produces more low scoring students and brings the average down. This isn't really a mystery and isn't evidence of female superiority. This is barely even about IQ. It's the other side of the same coin that drives the differences in male and female entrepreneurs.

Very roughly:

Males
>risk taking
>disagreeable
>strongest support structures local and interpersonal

Females
>risk adverse
>agreeable
>strongest support structures global and societal

[Anonymous No.10273637]

>>10273619
imagine being a scientist and spouting bullshit like 'statistically more agreeable' when such a thing isn't even quantifiable or substantiated outside the realm of bullshit psych papers that give diametrically-opposite results depending on which crank's paper you read

[Anonymous No.10273647]

>>10273637
>somehow has a problem with the single most mundane and stable part of psychological research

[Anonymous No.10273724]

>>10273647
stable in your opinion

[Anonymous No.10273726]

>>10273169
they're favorized by creepy male whiteknight teachers ffs

[Anonymous No.10273735]

>>10273724
This is very true my friend. ids all jus oBinions XDXD

[Anonymous No.10273742]

>“Women in male-dominated pursuits, including STEM, face a paradox: If they conform to gender stereotypes, they might be perceived as less competent, but if they defy gender stereotypes and perform ‘like a man,’ then their progress can be halted by ‘backlash’ from both men and women,” she and colleagues wrote.

[Anonymous No.10273752]

>>10273572
Not him, but engies are as normie as STEM kids get, besides medicine. Probably the most attractive STEM group (besides, of course, medicine) but definitely far from the smartest.

[Anonymous No.10273775]

>>10273752
What would you recommend Mr. Smartypants?

[Anonymous No.10273815]

Oh Boy, many of you could need a sociology 101, before spouting around baseless sexist assumptions about how all women are like this and all men like that.

Society clearly rewards character traits in women that lead to success in a learning environment, such as obedience. Not so for men.
And for all of you men feeling threatened.
Feel assured: studies Show that womens grade premium does not translate to higher occupational prestige jobs, higher wages or the like.

If you want to achieve power and money the system is rigged against women. If you want to live comfy without responsibility its rigged against men.


>>10273572
We have some smoking hot Asian boys in our physics grad programm. I assume them to be among the best too.

t. (Probably closet gay) physics grad student with an additional B.Sc.in sociology

[Anonymous No.10273818]

>>10273815
>the system is rigged against women
Incorrect. The playing field is pretty fucking level.

[Anonymous No.10273819]

>>10273225
>Women suffer less from the consequences of sexual excess. Men have high prolactin and a stronger urge to procreate. Losing semen is worse for a man than a woman menstruating.
>A woman cannot compete against a completely chaste man.


This is false

"
Men and non-pregnant women also produce prolactin, but it's not clear what the hormone does in these people. Studies have found that high prolactin levels in men are linked to low sexual desire and erectile dysfunction, and men suffering from such conditions are sometimes tested for high prolactin levels."

[Anonymous No.10273824]

>>10273169

[Anonymous No.10273825]

>>10273824

[Anonymous No.10273827]

>>10273825

[Anonymous No.10273830]

>>10273827

[Anonymous No.10273841]

[Anonymous No.10273846]

>>10273449
Anyone can look good with a nice body, braces (to get nice teeth) and good hygiene

[Anonymous No.10273858]

>>10273169
we're fuck

[Anonymous No.10273860]

>>10273169
>Girls do better in all subjects.
hmm (((who))) might be behind this post

[Anonymous No.10273865]

>>10273169

[Anonymous No.10273867]

>>10273865

[Anonymous No.10273873]

>>10273865
>>10273867
You weren't supposed to point this out

[Anonymous No.10273889]

>>10273873
why not?

[Anonymous No.10273897]

>>10273169
It's a constant effort to boost female standing relative to male standing. And they never consider that any "improvements" are the result of their effort, rather that it was there all along.
one might find it to be an exercise in futility then.

[Anonymous No.10273911]

>>10273897
>constant effort to boost female standing relative to male standing
>improvements were there all along
What many people dont understand that, to these activists, anything male or has a connotation of masculinity is inherintly evil, including the fact that STEM is traditionally dominated by males.
What has driven these people to this conclusion, who knows? Perhaps, like many movements, they looked to their forefathers(foremothers?) and saw that they achieved purpose through activism and decided, that they too, will become activsts. Herein lies the problem, however, that there was not much left to be active for, so, again, like so many idealogical movements before it, they started to invent problems, such as the "patriarchy" and "discrimination against women in STEM" or "#metoo" or whatever topic is relevant to these people right now
Always remember, the only difference between misandry and misogyny is that misandry has become socially acceptable through decades of publc conditioning.

[Anonymous No.10273934]

A few good reads, feel free to send them to your feminist colleagues.

https://pastebin.com/eKnurH6G

[Anonymous No.10273940]

>>10273815
>le blank slate meme

k

[Anonymous No.10273950]

>>10273815
>If you want to achieve power and money the system is rigged against women. If you want to live comfy without responsibility its rigged against men.
this is a really interesting point of view, can you elaborate a little more or link some papers on the matter?

[Anonymous No.10274022]

>>10273300
women are worthless because they refuse to do stem. they are lazy fucking bitches and prefer to do something easy like gender studies rather than something to further humanity. women have proven that they can do stem very effectively and this is obvious because most science and math Fields involve mundane repetitive tasks rather than thinking outside the box. the ideal research facility would be 80% women doing the drudge with 20% men sitting around playing with toys getting hammered and dropping acid until they have revelations for the women to investigate and prove. a man is a little ideas factory but will go into zombie mode and possibly commit mass murder if he is expected to do repetitive tasks with no reward

[Anonymous No.10274034]

>>10274022
This. Look at science in the 50s when most of calculators were women while men did the theoretical stuff.

[Anonymous No.10274073]

>>10274022
based and redpilled

[Anonymous No.10274075]

>>10273449
this is the most redpilled shit i´ve ever read

[Anonymous No.10274079]

>>10273491

[Anonymous No.10274083]

Anyone whos worked with women knows theyre studious and more worried about perfromance. Most guys love to cut corners and be lazy

[Anonymous No.10274088]

>>10274022
This is what I was talking about in the OP.
Men will be the ideas factories and women will be the calculators.
The men who can't come up with ideas will be useless though.

[Anonymous No.10274093]

>>10273169
>""""study"""" with literally made up results

Also, gb2/pol/ and botpost your shit there, OP.

[Anonymous No.10274095]

>>10274075
it doesn’t account for male-female iq and creativity differences so its kind of purple pilled desu

[Anonymous No.10274101]

>>10274095
Lower IQ women can do repetitive tasks and contribute to society.
Meanwhile low IQ men become criminals.
You're not accounting for the Y chromosome.

[Anonymous No.10274163]

>girls haven´t invented anything or discovered anything or ever created anythign because of oppression


Didn´t Einstein literally escape a genocide that killed half his race, then go onto solve the most difficult problems in the universe with a fucking pencil and paper hiding in a cabin in the woods?

ok so no female astronauts because you need a spaceship...but for mathematics literally no one is fucking stopping you from doing maths in your head or on a computer, or on paper.

[Anonymous No.10274169]

>>10273607
those women went to university looking for husbands.

saw the men in stem and bailed out

[Anonymous No.10274306]

>>10273386
>It's only when the kid starts doing stupid shit like taking anger out through severe bullying [...] when their friends and adults step in.
Unless its genuine physical abuse then they have no reason to step in, why disrupt group dynamics and the natural order in socialization with their peers? They should learn this earlier on and its perfectly healthy especially if they're highschool aged. Teaches responsibility, the importance of assertiveness/dominance as a male and independence with zero risk or illegality.

[Anonymous No.10274364]

I think the bigger issue is treating colleges as litmus test to determine if you deserve to work minimum wage or not. Sex ratios in academia shouldn't have to even matter.

[Anonymous No.10274390]

>>10273244
>Girls suffer less from certain kinds of developmental mental illnesses.
And suffer more from (other) certain kinds too?

[Anonymous No.10274392]

They can also build more muscle than me

[Anonymous No.10274533]

>>10273177
unfortunately, that's quite common. First parents push girls to have great grades even though they have no talent, then the girls find out that all the boys in the world want to help them with math.
Most of girls in STEM are a product of pity, parent's ambition or sexual desire of guys who are good at math.
I've seen many times when girls at a technical university were treated way better whether it was a conscious intention or not from their tutors.
There are some skilled girls but from the already huge sample size I can deduce maybe 10% of those girls is 'girly'

[Anonymous No.10274548]

>>10273169
They don't have the ambition, ruthlessness and risk taking men do. In any most field (except biology) *cough*
females would get dominated. You can think of as the wild.

[Anonymous No.10274606]

In what grades?

[Anonymous No.10274620]

>>10273169
the best part about these threads is the /pol/tard cope. all of a sudden, test score averages cease to matter and other environmental factors and explanations come into play.

[Anonymous No.10274675]

>>10274620
The very creation of these threads is womyn cope.

Average test scores cease to matter? IQ tests prove women are less intelligent than men, you think circling the 100 mark is something to be proud of? /sci/ doesn't care if some men are dumb, we need them to keep society going and it's less competition for those with the capacity to study STEM subjects.

Call me when there are as many women as men with IQ 120+.

[Anonymous No.10274684]

>>10274163
Everyone who accomplished anything faced oppression, women have never faced real oppression since tyrants have never seen them as an active threat, they're a political nuisance at the best, but anyone who owns their position to force and doesn't care about approval has absolutely no reason to care about women one way or the other.

In comparison, a man that could be a threat in the future? You're fucked.

[Anonymous No.10274697]

>>10273637
This anon is just salty because no female has ever been statistically more agreeable to his cock

[Anonymous No.10274700]

>>10274684
>boko haram raid village and massacre thousands and thousands of men and boys, executing them, double tapped back of head.

>take girls to forest to learn religion and how not to be a slut

>bring back our girls.

[Anonymous No.10274786]

>>10273647
>>10273724
Stable in every intelligent person's opinion. When women are proven to be far more passive according to psychological study, when Biology (hint: a SCIENCE) gives several reasons for this on top of the common sense answer of women being weaker and much less physically aggressive, when thousands of years of history, across races, cultures and continents ALL tell us that women are more agreeable than men, we can walk away relatively comfortable that it's true.

Honestly you braindead cunt, do you want quantifiable proof that females carry and care for children, or is it just the consequences of this you're choosing to ignore.

[Anonymous No.10274814]

>>10273619
My dad is an entrepreneur that has those traits. And he made it.

[Anonymous No.10274859]

>>10273619
>I'm in a STEM PhD program with a lot of women who are smarter than most men
Calling bullshit, most of the men in STEM aren't even that smart, the women are even worse, Harpies getting by on diversity laws. Cannot believe you idiots are now claiming your stupidity is down to "neuroticism", there's always an excuse with you people.

[Anonymous No.10274865]

>>10273619
> I'm in a STEM PhD program with a lot of women who are smarter than most men.
Being smarter than most men is not an accomplishment. Are these women smarter than most of their male colleagues? What fields do they work in?

[Anonymous No.10274869]

>>10274859
where are the smart people if not in STEM programs...?

the termite experiment showed, all high iq 130+ go to university...and many more than average go to grad school

[Anonymous No.10274924]

I was in pharmacy school until last semester. I failed because I had to study for 5+ hours daily to keep up with all the information, but I am a lazy shit and decided to just drop out instead.

The only friend I had in the class was a really cute girl who managed to do better than me during every single quiz/exam. She made it seem effortless and it absolutely crushed my self-esteem. Clearly, she's not an idiot, but she comes off as being pretty naive and immature. The whole thing has left me puzzled and bewildered beyond belief.

[Anonymous No.10274933]

>>10274924
great pic

[Anonymous No.10274959]

>>10273244
citation needed

[Anonymous No.10274960]

>>10273350
I wonder if he imagined he had good intentions.

[Anonymous No.10274963]

>>10273846
cope

[Anonymous No.10274972]

>>10273449
>THIS DOESN'T APPLY TO WOMEN, BECAUSE THEIR SEXUAL OPPORTUNITIES AREN'T REALLY AFFECTED BY WEALTH/POWER/STATUS BUT BY THEIR LOOKS.

they still want wealth to give their kids the best chance in life.

[Anonymous No.10274974]

>>10273503
nigger?

[Tuba Jam No.10275086]

>>10273209
women are supposedly better at periodic responsibilities like homework, while men are believed to tend to avoid doing things they don't fully see the point of. This is why the stereotypical "smart but lazy" child is a boy and the annoying grade grubber is a girl. I don't know if the data supports this.

[Anonymous No.10275090]

>>10273572
>mech-engi
So a brainlet then?

[Anonymous No.10275137]

>>10275086
wouldn't a lot of highschool aged boys avoid mathematics then?

[Tuba Jam No.10275149]

>>10275137
good point. Maybe the quick, reliable cycle of mini-endorphin rushed of applying the given method to solve many simple problems is what gets them going, while long-form less well defined things like essays and projects, with fewer "checkpoints" cause frustration? Idk, I'm not a social scientist or anthropologist.

[Anonymous No.10275160]

>>10275149
It could contribute. I suppose I'm a bit of a brainlet, since I always had a fair bit of difficulty in highschool math, but I've always been "gifted" in reading and writing. Personally, I blame it on my math teacher since it's easier than accepting that I'm retarded and I was homeschooled for all of hs. I think it could really just be a factor of how easy it comes to them, because the people I know who never had trouble with math just sort of "do it," while they do often procrastinate a ton for actual papers and big assignments. It could be because of the structure of a lot of math classes, since you don't need to write a 4 page essay on multiplication, you just have to learn how to multiply.

[Anonymous No.10275173]

>>10273565
How exactly does school favor "retards" instead of "people with actual ability"?

[Anonymous No.10275892]

>>10275173
Don't mind that guy. He's projecting

[Anonymous No.10275901]

>>10273360
Imagine how fast a society would collapse if nigger females were given control.

[Anonymous No.10275902]

>>10273169

That's because men can easily find careers that don't require schooling (such as skilled trades). College is pretty much the only option for girls

[Anonymous No.10275908]

Girls do better at being told what to do. If Jewish media says have sex with chimps they will have sex with chimps. This is why anthropology, sociology and psychology are completely useless today. These areas of study are filled with females who are far more concerned with social norms then they are with science and finding objective truth.

[Anonymous No.10275910]

>>10274620
test scores barely matter in the real world

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aKLPr9epQQ

[Anonymous No.10275942]

>>10273607
Mass balances should just be common sense. My 9 year old brother can understand the concept.

[Anonymous No.10275980]

grade inflation is no joke either, getting straight As should be like for geniuses, not for everyone who isn't lazy and retarded, the grading standards vary between different schools and different teachers as well

[Anonymous No.10275998]

>>10273169
>it's another "lets take conclusions out of non significant differences" studio

[Anonymous No.10276054]

>>10274972

It's been proven many times that wealth is great until a certain point. When you are too rich you become a degenerate and your kids will be lazy degenerates since they have everything handed to them all the time.

[Anonymous No.10276059]

>>10273199
>Then why are 99% of all scientists, innovators, philosophers, and statesmens male?

It's not even close to 99% today. Closer to 80%.

Keep in mind women have equal chances and access to education and career for 70 years at best. And this is when you talk only about most advanced places on Earth.

Not even one century and they went from like 0.01% to 20-30% in many fields.

[Anonymous No.10276170]

>>10274859
What. Only and solely smart people have phds.
I know what I'm talking about. My IQ is 105, I learned 48 hours every single week and I'm a 2 times college dropout at age 25 who failed most of his degrees 2 times in a row.

So no, work ethic has nothing to do with it, only genetically gifted people are in stem.

[Anonymous No.10276178]

>>10276170
What were you studying and how did you manage to drop out twice? (as opposed to graduating with a meh 3.0-3.5 gpa or so)

[Anonymous No.10276181]

>>10276178
I'm a German, first I studied CS and got depressed in the middle of the second semester and dropped out due to no friends and living alone (and had shitty grades).
Then I studied Wirtschaftsinformatik which I hated since day 1, but studied regardless and dropped out after 4 semester since at least 40% of my exams had a third try.

[Anonymous No.10276191]

>>10276181
So either you're making excuses, or your IQ had nothing to do with it?

[Anonymous No.10276196]

>>10276191
IQ is one of the most researched theories and it's pretty much universally accepted. I literally studied more than >90% of all the other students and failed or passed with the worst 5 grades.

IQ is everything, people with a such a low IQ as myself shouldn't be allowed in universities or they destroy their lifes.

[Anonymous No.10276202]

>>10274972
most women are perfectly happy with marrying some joe schmoe with an average income

[Anonymous No.10276210]

>>10276196
I agree with the IQ thing, but I thought 105 would be sufficient for at least a bachelor's. Studying while depressed or not liking the subject is not the same as studying while being in a healthy frame of mind. I don't know any geniuses who hated their subject of study (but I know a lot of people who aren't geniuses despite being fascinated by their field of study)

[Anonymous No.10276221]

>>10274169
The men in engineering are more attractive than the women. Aside from subjective assessment most of us married before graduation (only one guy married the moderately attractive girl in our class). I married an attractive medstudent. Except for the one none of the other girls are married even today.

It's more accurate to say that ugly women go into engineering because they see it as a means to provide for themselves (they end up getting meh jobs brcause of bad grades, but some get quota placements). The ones that just want husbands study something easy like finance or visual arts do they can spend their day husband hunting engineers (I promise this is based on several true and consistent anecdotes: they literally sit outside engineering labs and libraries for several hours a day in skimpy clothes trying to get guys to pick them up; of course engineering men actually prefer their smarter friends doing STEM, econ or medicine.

>>10275942
Exactly it's an easier version of logic circuits. You have basic rules that any child can understand and then the lecturer increases problem complexity without demanding any external knowledge. It's an IQ test and most women get cut off and kicked out. I don't know how long the departments will still be allowed to that. In America the grade inflation is already so bad at some universities that their problems have become much easier over the years to boost pass rates despite the international Himmelblau standard being born in the states.

[Anonymous No.10276228]

>>10273169
It's practically illegal to give girls bad grades and for sure grounds for a lawsuit. This is a logical result to that sort of "equality."

[Anonymous No.10276237]

>>10273191
It's also because the vast majority of teachers are women and policies have been being made to improve girls grades better than guys for decades. It was a direct goal for "equality" that women have 'advantages' over men, and now they do.
Pragamatic no affirmative action no bonus points for your chromosome structure education is best, but it's long dead.

[Anonymous No.10276248]

>>10276210
>105 would be sufficient for at least a bachelor's.
It is for non-STEM bachelors, average IQ for engineering students is around 125 and 130 for physics and math. Obviously graduate school is higher but not by much. As others have mentioned many "individuals" get forces through to fill diversity qoutas it's not a myth I've been forced to remark exams by my HoD because of political pressure on him.

[Anonymous No.10276250]

>>10273169
>girls are smarter than boys!
>fight sex stereotypes today!
Why the fuck are we bending reality to make girls 'do better in academics'.
China isn't doing this shit.

[Anonymous No.10276255]

>>10273169
>China leads the world in 75% of all breaking edge research, including in terms of papers cited by western nations/universities/corporations.
>China DOESN'T forcefully give girls better grades than guys to force equal outcomes in education, and actually believes the smartest student should be seen as such.
WOW what a coincidence!

[Anonymous No.10276262]

In the 1990s there was no sexism in my school against the girls, they had every opportunity to succeed like I did. They weren't being given special advantages compared to today though, so men still dominated every subject.
In today's world, we have to "pretend" even while literally in academia, and just give girls bonuses until they are winning. It's national suicide, China isn't doing this and they are surpassing us.

[Anonymous No.10276265]

>>10273169
I am not even a bitter incel but most women are better off socially than most men. Even shy girls can be quite resourceful socially. They always form massive study groups and are the ki-, queens of cramming. I see it all the time. Also this only really works in lower level math and physics courses anyway.

[Anonymous No.10276273]

>>10276265
>Women can violently attack people and not get in trouble, or get a person in trouble if they defend against the violent attack and aren't also a girl.
>Women can sue you for discrimination for not giving them bonus points to have an advantage over others.
>Women can make up lies and ruin your professor career.
>Women are not punished for their actions and do not ever see the downsides of their choices, nor are they held responsible for them, usually even in criminal justice.
Men would be 'more social' if they were a socially protected class too, instead we are taught to grin and bear the state raping us and to love the fact that women are given the primary advantages as we slave away.

[Anonymous No.10276287]

>>10276273
Okay. Thank you for aggressively agreeing with me.

[Anonymous No.10276298]

>>10273819
Prolactin release is the physiological response that accompanies the male orgasm, brainlet, bringing on the refractory period, and it remains elevated long after it where it continues to exert anti-dopaminergic effects on other systems like the prefrontal cortext. Your quote shows nothing but your own ignorance as it fails to bear any relevance other than the fact that prolactin is universal which was not denied in the first place; my point still stands. Yes, women produce it too in response to sexual satiety but it does not compare to that of a man. Prolactin is why men are tired after sex and women aren't.
Seems like the premise that sexual activity has a cost deeply bothered you and this is just an attempt to rationalize your own indulgence. Many men admit not only to morning masturbatory/copulatory activity, but also do it at work. It has a cost, and it makes them mediocre. Chaste men will always be more motivated and outcompete their drained male counterparts and females alike; even moderately chaste men, i.e. those who deny morning and mid-day sexual release, will be much more productive and focused than a guy who beats off in the morning and in the stall. Sexual stimuli is limitless and almost everywhere in this current age, sexual norms have become loser, and it is incorrectly held in high esteem by most people, even thought to be "good" for them and will indulge it every single chance they get, and can be hypothesized to be at a greater frequency than almost ever. Men suffer a larger hormonal and neurochemical toll than women, and are much more adversely impacted by excessive indulgence.

[Anonymous No.10276362]

>>10273169
The cancerous gynocentrism of women needs to be addressed.

[Anonymous No.10276420]

>>10276298
ok so if i'm gonna fap once a day you reckon it's better for me if i do it in the evening before i go to sleep rather than in the morning after i wake up?

[Anonymous No.10276456]

>>10276273
On the first point we allow it because we want women to feel confident in defending themselves. We don't want our wives and daughter to get raped by Muslim incels in broad daylight just because they feared legal repurcussions. Non-creepy looking men aren't affected by this.

The other points are mostly not true.

On the last part just get a wife and you can share her benefits with your family, you will still earn more anyway though.

[Anonymous No.10276540]

>>10273449
>there are no female incels
Then why does feminism exist?

[Anonymous No.10276588]

>>10276059
>Not even one century
dude one century is a lot of time

[Anonymous No.10276620]

>>10276456
Women should not feel confident that they can assault others with no repercussions, it has no bearing on their right to self defense. Of age women should carry a pistol to negate strength and agility differences between herself and possible assailants. The idea that instead, she should be granted the right to attack others without consequence is obscene.
>the other points are mostly not true.
Way to avoid addressing them.
>on the last part, you can be dependent on your wife.
So men should be dependent and women should be independent? This seems likely to breed an 'incel' population, which it has. I was answering op not moral grandstanding like you.

[Anonymous No.10276623]

>>>10273169
>Male educators constitute just 2.3% of pre-K and kindergarten teachers, 18.3% of the elementary and middle school teacher population, and 42% of the high school level teaching staff. These numbers are down from 2007, but suggest a clear female majority in the teaching profession, especially in the earlier grades.
>Women have more patience for women, less patience for men
>So if a guy is going to get any extra help with school it must come from some source other than the school itself
>Parents of males generally hire private tutors to ensure their success, which excludes many families who can't afford it
>Parents of females can rely on teachers to spend extra time helping their kid because women give girls the benefit of the doubt
>BOD also goes to girls on grading
-------
>Zero tolerance for male coded conflict (punches, tackles, any kind of potentially violent confrontation)
>Plenty of tolerance for female coded conflict (no suspension for coordinating an entire group of friends to ignore one person, despite similar harm to just a punch or something)
-------
>Video games, marijuana, movies, pornography all pander to basest male instincts
>USA welfare apparatus accidentally incentivizes remaining on disability
>Fathers' influence and male coded virtues are seen as less desirable or even toxic
-------
>Plenty of initiatives and mentorship for girls in STEM, less for men

Yeah basically the system strongly favors women. Go out there and mentor some young men, give young men as much benefit of the doubt and second chances as you can, take care of your male friends and family.

[Anonymous No.10276637]

>>10276059
70 years is multi generational, are you saying women are less intelligent than men, and so they can't do well in school even though they were born into a society where they have all the advantages?
Girls have all the advantages of boys for 70 years, there's no excuses now, and any increase in women in STEM is forced.

[Anonymous No.10276654]

>>10276588
>>10276637

Social change is not a new smartphone. This shit takes time. Some people born back when women barely had any rights are alive now. You really think most parents in the 70's raised their daughters telling them they can be scientists? Equal rights on paper mean shit when your mommy hits you in the head because you want to play with computers not dolls she bought for you.

[Anonymous No.10276659]

>>10276623
>Women have more patience for women, less patience for men

Complete bullshit. Tons of female teachers are complete bitches to young girls because they look better than them. Same as plenty male teachers are super nice to girls while shitting all over boys.

[Anonymous No.10276683]

Women are good at checking boxes. Teacher wants A,B, and C for the test, they can spit out A,B, C on the test and get good grades.

Real science requires you to come up with D, and thats where women struggle.

[Anonymous No.10276702]

>>10276683
Alot of science is memorization

[Anonymous No.10276778]

>>10276654
>this shit takes time.
No it doesn't, are you claiming we need to wait millenia for women to evolve or something? The adult women of today were born with heavy advantages over their male counterparts, and now are 'doing better' than men, what delusion requires your arbitrary million years of advantage for 'fairness' to be met?
>Equal rights on paper.
Kids get taken from their parents for the stuff you are describing, I've witnessed it. Rare, taboo, and already criminal behavior is not an example of how women are oppressed.

[Anonymous No.10276782]

>>10276654
>some girls have abusive parents
So do some boys. Boys are committing suicide at higher rates than girls because society is favoring them.

[Anonymous No.10276784]

>>10276654
Social change is now boys commit suicide way more than girls, and girls graduate college more than boys.
How much more "social change" are women aiming for than that?

[Anonymous No.10276794]

>>10276683
this

[Anonymous No.10277119]

>>10276170
If you are in a real PhD program, you will be forced to cultivate a solid work ethic on top of the above average intelligence required for admission

[Anonymous No.10277156]

>>10273169
The more important question we should be asking is why there aren't fewer women in STEM. For the AVERAGE woman, what is the real value of STEM? Why is it a good investment of substantial time, effort, and money?

[Anonymous No.10277183]

>>10276654
>when women barely had any rights
men also didn't have any right, the won the right to vote just a couple of decade before women( women didn't need to go to the draft so in the end they get a better deal), the aristocrats were the ones with rights and privilege

[Anonymous No.10277294]

>>10276540
Women want it all even when they have it all and don't even know what "it all" is?

[Anonymous No.10277324]

>>10276654
so? most male CS majors probably were discouraged from spending the entire day on the computer. Did that stop men?
It just shows that while men adapt and excel women bitch and requires handouts

[Anonymous No.10277364]

>>10276170
>only genetically gifted people are in stem.

You're a fucking moron, literally no one believes this, ESPECIALLY men who have actually studied STEM subjects, there may be a higher amount of intelligent people on average for obvious reasons, but the biggest majority are just average people who have been pushed, have specific end games they strongly wish to achieve or just wanted something they think will give them the best prospects in life.

The fact you believe everyone who gets a PhD is a genius after claiming that most women you know at that level are smarter than the men (objectively false, IQ testing has proven this) shows you're either extremely misinformed or just a liar.

[Anonymous No.10277365]

Come back to me when women are better at critical thinking, fluid intelligence, and innovation.

[Anonymous No.10277369]

>>10277364
Missed this
>>10276181
>German
>The biggest bootlickers in the world and biggest backers of the EU and their equalitarian values
>Claims to suffer depression and whines about low IQ
>Makes ridiculous claims about women being smarter than men

Yeah forget what I said about stupid, you're just repeating what you've been told to. Sorry German bro, try to think for yourself, get some exercise and really think about what you want to do with life, be more like your more free-thinking allies.

[Anonymous No.10277387]

>>10274959
Life is enough of a citation to know all of that holds true to the majority so fuck off with your "im gonna need a source" Look around you idiot.

[Anonymous No.10277389]

Do people actually think grades mean anything? even in stem? I'm a TA and from my point of view grades reflect nothing at all.

[Anonymous No.10277490]

>>10274700
this isn't actually what happened though, is it?

[Anonymous No.10278056]

>>10273867
I'm too much of a brainlet to understand this. pls explain

[Anonymous No.10278119]

>>10277490
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHhVyeHRxWk

it is

[Anonymous No.10278143]

>>10276620
I agree with you on the first paragraph, but our lefty politicians do not. Hence muslims and no gun ownerships on the street. Luckily the judges understand the dilema.

>dependent on wife

I literally just said you will more which is statistically true. If you earn less than your wife it is your own fault. If you earn a modest salary then your wife's extra income will benefit your salary. If you are very successful then a concept like salary doesn't even matter.

[Anonymous No.10278220]

>>10277364
Are you dense? I never mentioned women in my post and in Germany, 80% men are in STEM.

Despite that I don't care what you think. I know I studied 40-50 hours a week every single week and still failed.

[Anonymous No.10278224]

But how many women are willing to sacrifice having kids and a family to spend the time necessary to make the best discoveries and advancements. That's the true advantage men have in STEM, they are more willing to put in the serious time and stay the whole way through.

[Anonymous No.10278227]

>>10278220
Simply because life as a lonely isolated male without social skills is worse than hell. Would I at least have an high IQ, okay, that's something I can live with it, but to deal with a antisocial persona and a low IQ on top of that? I would be surprised if I don't hang myself before 30.

I'm literally human waste.

[Anonymous No.10278544]

>>10276782
Okay so back when society was favouring men, were there less suicides?

[Anonymous No.10278561]

Good grades in school come down to socializing. Interacting with professors and study or confront with people. Women are good at that.

[Anonymous No.10278810]

>>10275137
>>10275160
I think that it has to do with the idea that it takes less effort to do well in a math class if you're good at it; not really the case with other subjects because they mostly just require strict memorization and tedious amount of assignments.

[Anonymous No.10278834]

>>10273169
money=success, not grades=success, nice try meninists, these women are graduating with a great GPA but will soon be welcomed to the wonderful real work, aka doing actual research or getting a job, and sucking the professor's metaphorical cock is different than having a cock and balls, which is what is needed most of the time

[Anonymous No.10278859]

>>10273191
this. Another thing is that they generally have little interest in grasping something on a "deeper" level. This is why high level math is male dominated and girls tend to excel in fields that require strict rote learning and discipline I.E. med / finance / law

When faced with a math problem my baby sister literally memorizes the steps needed to solve the question without actually grasping it, so that when the question is slightly different she wouldn't have a clue what to do. It's absolutely bizzare but she sees nothing wrong with it, like it's perfectly acceptable to forget how to fry an egg because you're using a different pan

[Anonymous No.10278879]

>>10278834
Women already have 2/3rds of the wealth. Feminism is irrelevant except as a way to suppress and oppress men, it's cultural suicide, or more likely, foreign influence designed to destroy our society. Women already control about 2/3rds of private wealth in the United States and it's their vote who determines who is president. Women picked Trump that's why he's in office.
>end the patriarchy!

[Anonymous No.10280074]

>>10273169
Usually females do better in the classroom and fall behind in the actual work. I have participated in many group projects for engineering at my uni but usually females have a hard time keeping up and are often unmotivated to do anything that isnt just solving things on paper or just studying. They arent very good with hands on stuff.

[Anonymous No.10280113]

>>10278879
They don't know they're in control. They don't take the lead.

[Anonymous No.10280153]

>>10274700
>teach them religion
You mean by Raping the girls

[Anonymous No.10280469]

>>10280113
Modern feminism is a cargo cult. They want the trappings of a perceived patriarchy (money, status, independence) without realizing these are are only the byproducts of intense male competition and self-assorting, which they try to criticize and eliminate at every opportunity as "toxic." Feminism is a walking, talking category fallacy. Women that stay in the cargo cult for too long mindlessly chanting "I'm a strong independent womyn. I don't need no man. I'm gonna be a CEO" end up 35, confused, and lonely with five cats. Why? Because some shithead told them to do this when they were very young and they unquestioningly did it. Because they're women and women do what they're told.

[Anonymous No.10280538]

>>10278859
>memorizes the steps needed to solve the question without actually grasping it
/thread
women are button pushers. they lack significant enough fluid intelligence to really hang with the boys.

[Anonymous No.10280541]

>>10273169
>Girls do better in all subjects

[Anonymous No.10280563]

>>10273201
Like in Sweden

[Anonymous No.10280740]

>>10273169
there's a lot of instagram thots in STEM

https://www.instagram.com/brigittegoudz/

[Anonymous No.10280741]

>>10276420
Without doubt, yes.

[Anonymous No.10282376]

>>10273169
>Girls get graded less harshly than men because WAH WAH MISOGYNY AND PATRIARCHY WAH WAH!
>Girls start getting higher average grades.
What a fucking mystery.

[Anonymous No.10282439]

>>10273169
>...girls are better at studying on average in all cases.
Yeah, a smaller neural network requires less data to train and generalizes better. This isn't news, really.

[Anonymous No.10282455]

>>10282439
Neural networks aren't actual simulations of how brains work. You can't compare them like you're trying to do.

[Anonymous No.10282816]

>>10282455
>Neural networks aren't actual simulations of how brains work. You can't compare them like you're trying to do.

>What is the VC dimension of any learning model
>What is VC theory
>What is generalization

You're pretty clueless about this, aren't you? You just read that ANNs are not very much like our brains, right?

Again, simpler brains learn faster. Period.
More complex brains can handle more complex ideas. Period.

[Anonymous No.10283656]

>>10275910
So the black-white IQ and test gap is irrelevant?

[Anonymous No.10283722]

>>10273169
it's over for menoids

[Anonymous No.10283730]

https://www.fairtest.org/sat-act-gender-gaps

Men outperform women in both math and reading (albiet by a much smaller margin) on the SAT. Not sure what the OP is talking about

[Anonymous No.10283734]

Daily reminder that women are inferior to men in all task expect giving birth

[Anonymous No.10283739]

>Despite a growing body of evidence demonstrating that the test consistently underpredicts the academic ability of young women (see Examiner, Winter 1996-97), the SAT gender gap actually increased by one point to 40. Females now score 36 points below males on the Math portion of the SAT and 4 points lower on Verbal. The ACT gender gap grew by one-tenth of a point to .3, the equivalent of about 12 points on the SAT. Changes to the Preliminary SAT (PSAT) made to settle FairTest's gender bias civil rights complaint (see Examiner, Summer 1997) have not been applied to the SAT, ACT or tests used for graduate school admissions.

[Anonymous No.10283743]

>>10273169
This is why I'm taking estrogen and buying skirts on amazon, OP

[Anonymous No.10283760]

>sleep with professor
>teehee look how good my grades are!
>sleep with some desperate nerd
>look at my impressive projects, internship pls
It's not every girl, but it's a lot of them. I know it for a fact. Was solicited twice and I was just barely in the 90th percentile of my class and was ugly to boot, can hardly imagine the tail the top guys with perfect hair and teeth were getting.

[Anonymous No.10283767]

>>10277389
Reflects how much the professor likes you.

[Anonymous No.10283785]

Again, women only outperform men because of low-achieving minority/single parent households. Most of those gaps go away without that

[Anonymous No.10283800]

>>10283743
Based and underrated.

[Anonymous No.10283810]

>>10273169
>However females don't take risks.
Can't be that smart then.
Imagine being unable to express will.

[Anonymous No.10283829]

>Check news article
>“Overall, girls had significantly higher grades than boys by 6.3 percent,” they wrote in their report, published in the journal Nature Communications.

>check article they sourced and the organisation involved
>Nature Communications
>open-access journals
Hmm, so potentially not peer reviewed.

>checked the article
>already smell something odd with it judging from the introduction.
nature . com / articles / s41467- 018- 06292-0 . pdf
(sorry for breaks, filter is being gay)

Also:
>Within the North American sample, 24% of studies were on a racially diverse cohort of students, 23% were on majority White/Caucasian students, 9% were on majority Black/ African American students, 1% were on majority Hispanic/Latino students, and 43% of studies did not provide information on the racial composition of students.
Odd.

[Anonymous No.10283834]

>>10283810
please stop posting your reddit faggot memes everywhere you dickless chinless stick bug

[Anonymous No.10283885]

>To test for moderating factors, we only used the school data in subsequent analyses. We excluded university students because there is self-selection among students in terms of who applies for (and is then accepted at) a university. This
selection process makes undergraduates and postgraduates unrepresentative of the general population.
Huh? That's still a bias in itself because men in school do not behave as they would later in life at university.
In fact, you'll likely find that men tend to fuck around in school, because they're teenagers full of testosterone.

>Discussion
>Gender differences in grade variability of school pupils was unaffected by their age, weakly
affected by the year of study, and most strongly affected by whether or not the subject was STEM.
And yet they conveniently miss uni variability.

Will post the article.

[Anonymous No.10283892]

>>10283885
I can't belive modern journalism is allowed to be this utterly garbage.

Remeber anons you are what you consume and it's no wonder the average person is so retarted since they are reading articles like this.

[Anonymous No.10283895]

>>10283834
I smell an angry roastie.
Anyway, posting the article.
1 of 4.

[Anonymous No.10283899]

>>10283895
2 of 4.

[Anonymous No.10283908]

>>10283899
3 of 4.

[Anonymous No.10283909]

>>10283908

[Anonymous No.10283910]

>>10275086
its just like my japanese anime

[Anonymous No.10283922]

>>10275086
Evolution supports this anon. If this article did prove otherwise, then it would turn the theory of evolution on it's head.

BUT, I would expect to see a small number of very intelligent men and the rest being pawns, as that is how the strongest armies of civilisations developed. That stat would support natural selection.
I would also expect to see a slim number of very intelligent women who probably see the same world as those intelligent men, like the small numbers of queens and empresses.
The rest would be better at homework as a result of the better chore completing housewives being more likely to pass on their genes than those who did not do their chores.


Overall, it paints a bleak picture of our past and how hellish it was.

[Anonymous No.10283948]

Women may do better in tests as they are probably more likely to ignore the hell that is the outside world. That doesn't mean they are more intelligent, that just means they're better workhorses that ignore their own threats. Why would that be so? Because it was naturally selected as a result of genes being passed from workhorse women better than the non-workhorse women. Furthermore, the men doing the fighting and perceiving the threat to the home may have been naturally selected in order to improve how the female worked in the home, by taking away distractions of threats.
That's a significant issue.
In fact, when I think of the issues with several firms in the article's country of origin, Australia, such as with AMP, I think it proves that there is an issue with the female perception of threats or modifying factors. They simply ignore them. It's almost a bit like this article to be honest, which is ignorant of this greater issue.

This article ultimately may prove nothing but our worst fears about how natural selection has affected men and women with regards to how they perceive their environment.

[Anonymous No.10283953]

>>10283895
proving you're a redditor retard, I wasn't disputing that women are physiologically, spiritually, morally and psychologically inferior I was telling you to go back to /tv/ and stay there nigger

[Anonymous No.10283960]

>>10283953
But Frodo is more of a 4chan wide meme.

[Anonymous No.10283966]

>>10283960
I don't like LOTR anymore because of people like (you) and this while strongly agreeing ideologically with the more inflammatory iterations of the various Hobbit posting memes.

[Anonymous No.10283981]

>>10283966
No, you're a faggot.

[Anonymous No.10284067]

>>10275086
>the stereotypical "smart but lazy" child is a boy and the annoying grade grubber is a girl
lol i went to a high school for autists/spergs and we had these so blatantly

[Anonymous No.10284086]

>>10284067

[Anonymous No.10284498]

This thread needs to get taken down. fucking poisonous.

[Anonymous No.10284516]

Women are stupid and I don't respect them.
That's right, I just have sex with them

[Anonymous No.10284538]

>>10284516
And that's the main reason they'll never lose the vote despite being children mentally. Yesterday a girl I know was telling me she watched Trump's speech and she hated him! I made her watch it with me and just because I'm a guy changed her whole position, and now she hates the media.

[Anonymous No.10284601]

>>10283885
I myself am evidence for this. How you were at school doesnt mean shit. I had below average grades and i preferred to do other things instead of studying harder. That didnt make me a brainlet fag, now im halfway (4th year) at medicine and while some of you faggots may say you just need to be a memorizer monkey its not the case once you enter the clinical cycle. Not having slept in three days for a test wont help you when it begins. In my country this cycle has 60% dropout rates because it takes more than applying what you have memorized.

[Anonymous No.10284699]

Idk where that's from, it's almost always a girl that drops out of any of my classes

I'm not even convinced it's about not learning well, just more likely to freak out

[Anonymous No.10284720]

>>10273192
It already is.

[Anonymous No.10284732]

>>10276221
>Being this autistic
kys

[Anonymous No.10284747]

All women are absolutely retarded, honestly. Why bother educating them in the first place?

[Anonymous No.10284774]

>>10284601
good luck in your studies, buddy

[Anonymous No.10284776]

>>10274364
based

[Anonymous No.10284813]

>>10284601
It's all memorization though. I'm a first year

[Anonymous No.10284877]

>>10275137
maths is FUN!

[Anonymous No.10284981]

Most of these problems would be solved by having gender exclusive k-12s

[Anonymous No.10285037]

Nearly every girl I know is placid, comfort obsessed and prone to just doing the bare minimum to get by, usually whining to get others to do the rest. I'm not surprised the world is going to bend itself to their whims because the world wants in their pants.

I don't blame them for it. I accept that most men are motivated by sex, aggression, weird feelings of mortality, the need to secure access to sex and so on. Women don't have the same urges, drives and desires. Whatever you say dear.

Testing can fuck off. Most academia is about sustaining the value of academia in a digital age where the cost of information is almost nothing. Academia needs to make itself as bland and appealing to undeveloped markets as possible. Not many women in STEM? Better tap that market quick before somebody else figures it out first.

Technology is making traditional blue collar roles less common. The future doesn't look bright for the average man who doesn't want to think too hard and just do some practical shit involving manual labour. This is a shame because it seems a wider symptom of jobs being day release jail bullshit.

Like who cares about a giant office filled with women wasting their lives away for the dubious benefit of being able to buy lunch? Just consumers on a hamster wheel, driving capital forward towards its goal of ensuring complete control over the general population.

[El Arcón No.10285041]

>>10273169
>Girls do better in all subjects.
Women are more likely to do what you tell them to do.

[Anonymous No.10285043]

>>10273169
It says they get better grades. It doesn't say they do better.

[Anonymous No.10285152]

Grades.

[Anonymous No.10285156]

>>10285041
Yeah unlike you who we told many times to fuck off and you still have yet to. That's probably why you're so piss poor at academics and too stubborn to actually learn

[Anonymous No.10285160]

>>10273386
Probably has more to do with us not buying into the mental health meme.

[Anonymous No.10285165]

>>10273169
>females don't take risks.
This is a lie. Also that's fine just don't be a dick about it, I don't have high self-esteem. I think men have more talent to be honest, the smart girls I knew in high school were grinding machines.

[Anonymous No.10285217]

>>10274533
Define girly girl.

[Anonymous No.10285895]

>>10283730

OP's data is from Australia.

>>10273169

OP's article takes data from Australia, which is confusing as I was under the impression that males earned higher grades by the conclusion of High School.

"A total of 47 students received the highest possible ATAR of 99.95, of which 14 were female and 33 male."

https://www.baka.com.au/education/atar-results-onethird-of-students-hit-8000-20141217-128zsa.html

[Anonymous No.10285896]

>>10285895
>>10283730

Also the SAT is basically an IQ test and is much more g-loaded. G-loaded tests arguably measure 'real intelligence' and so you would expect a male edge.

[Anonymous No.10287070]

>>10285896
The SAT isn't basically an IQ test, it's BARELY an IQ test. Just look at some of their sample test questions. A true IQ test requires one thing: fluency in the language that the test is given in so that you can read the questions - that's it. However, the SAT requires things like mathematical domain knowledge, prescriptive/descriptive grammatical rules, and a vocabulary much wider than an average native speaker. These things go beyond basic pattern matching - they're information that can be studied for and learned, which will prepare you for the SAT; a true intelligence test cannot be studied for, and thus your score will not change by a meaningful amount between individual tests.