Help, I'm beginning to resent women

contd
>"What are you into these days, honey?"
>"Oh, just ruminating on the shortcomings of your entire sex and the doom of Western civilization"
You're also making an ecological fallacy by assuming that the individuals within a group can be thought of as microcosms of the group as a whole. You're never going to meet a "group" of people, you meet one person at a time.

That one person has a history that you don't anything about. Maybe they were beat up by their stepdad, maybe there boss touched them inappropriately, maybe a stranger assaulted them at a college party. We are shaped by our lived experience just as much, if not more, than our group identity.

Example:
Did you know that men commit about 70-80% of the crime in the US? Why are men committing so much crime? Most serial killers and mass shooters are men. Most rapists and murderers are men. Most pedophiles are men. What is wrong with men?

Do you see how that's not useful for making a fair judgement of any one individual?

>I look past my laptop in my university lecture theatre for a moderately technical course. Half the girls are online shopping or watching *makeup tutorials*, while some three-quarters of the guys are paying attention.

Considering something like 60% of college degrees go to women, they seem to be paying plenty of attention.

Some guy who sits next to be looks at Reddit during lectures. Some other guy was watching a baseball game. Yet somehow I didn't feel the need to assume all the women were paying attention just because a few guys weren't.

You're suffering from confirmation bias, bro.

>Do you think that it is possible that women do things that are impressive and you just aren't hearing about it?
Not that I agree with the rest of OP's post, but no, not really. I guess it depends on what you consider impressive though.

Thank you for your very thoughtful response

>Do you think that it is possible that women do things that are impressive and you just aren't hearing about it?
Yes, it's certainly possible. But I feel given the society we live in, if women were accomplishing the same sort of feats that men are at the same frequency, for us to not hear about it, would take a concerted effort of massive proportions - ie, a conspiracy. Given that most social media outlets are overtly progressive, I find this highly unlikely.

>Women read more things than just "women's magazines"
Certainly - but this particular media is called women's magazines, and are customed almost entirely by women and no other group.

>You're drastically oversimplifying the "culture war". Frankly, very few women consider themselves SJW or even Feminists.
I agree.. and disagree. The radical left certainly is a minority. But again, if you look into the group, it's mostly women, pushing a self-stated 'feminine' philosophy.
Second, I talk to a lot of people. Most yohung girls hold social-justice ideas/have the worldview whether or not they acknowledge it.

>You're also making an ecological fallacy by assuming that the individuals within a group can be thought of as microcosms of the group as a whole. You're never going to meet a "group" of people, you meet one person at a time.
What you're referring to is individualism vs collectivism. I'd definitely an individualist - I judge people not by their groups but by their own merit.

I should clarify that in saying all this, I don't mean that I hate every women automatically. Only that I believe I've perceived an aggregate trend - a pattern of phenomenon in life, that is not universally applicable, but, at the same time, appropriate to be kept in mind, and not to be discarded.

Attached: Nj4nqwU1.png (960x720, 1.12M)

>I guess it depends on what you consider impressive though.

Always.

>In September 2017, Mexico was struck by what is believed to have been the country’s strongest earthquake in a century...
>“There are women on the front lines supporting rescue events, preparing food, distributing goods. The solidarity and mutual support is encouraging and is holding the city together in such harsh moments.”

>Iranian women have been raising a new challenge to their Islamic government, breaking one of its most fundamental rules by pulling off their headscarves in some of the busiest public squares and brandishing them in protest.
>“I was really stressed,” said the woman, “At the same time, I felt powerful."
Pic related

>Women’s groups organized a Congolese Women’s Forum for peace and equal political representation in September 2017
>Just weeks later, 80 local women were included at the table alongside militant groups in talks in the Kasai region of DRC, which has been a hotbed of violence.

>The U.S. team at the Pyeongchang Olympics is a living, breathing, butt-kicking example of what happens when women are treated equally and given opportunities
>Women are responsible for 12 of the 21 U.S. medals in Pyeongchang
>CHLOE KIM LANDS BACK-TO-BACK 1080S IN GOLD MEDAL RUN AT 2018 WINTER OLYMPICS

There's no way I can reach through your screen and force you to be impressed by these things. But when I see shit like this, I just -can't- look at women and think them inferior.

Attached: iran.jpg (835x655, 108K)

clichees exist for reasons and humans love to generalize, it helps us solve issues faster. with exception to women, that's an issue that's impossible to fix

>Did you know that men commit about 70-80% of the crime in the US? Why are men committing so much crime? Most serial killers and mass shooters are men. Most rapists and murderers are men. Most pedophiles are men. What is wrong with men?
Men are aggregately far more aggressive and exhibit more risk-taking behaviour than women. Men are also far more sexually focussed than women.This is almost certainly biologically rooted and a universally observed pattern.

Clearly, this does not mean that every man is a criminal. But, one can infer that the circumstances required for a man to *become* a criminal would look different than that of a woman -- along with a host of other inferences (eg how likely is it that a man will get into a physical fight if you push him enough; as opposed to a woman)

This is in fact exactly the kind of pattern that I propose my perception related in the OP is.

Well, it's been said multiple times in the thread, so I can't just ignore it. I'll have to consider this in detail

Attached: 1522395078193.png (320x297, 138K)

So what's the issue? Yeah, welcome to the real world, men tend to do more things for the group (family, tribe, society) and women do more things for themselves and their children. That's just the way things are. Do you even understand why there are 2 sexes? Pick up a biology book, it will help you much more than obsessing over who did what.

Seriously, that's how reality work. Being upset by it is ridiculous. You made up your perfect little idea of how things should work and what women should be and when reality doesn't conform you throw a fit. I guess it's better than some of the dumbasses in this thread who just cover their eyes and ears and ignore reality to maintain their silly beliefs. But if you keep being annoyed by it and refusing to accept it you're just gonna become a bitter cunt, which is worse than being an ignorant cunt.

Yeah, generally women do less "cool things". What a fucking tragedy. Get over it.

>if women were accomplishing the same sort of feats that men are at the same frequency

I don't believe they are. Does that mean that women are causing the "doom of western civilization" as you put it? Certainly not. The paradigm shift in our culture, or what you referred to as a "culture war" is more complex than you're making it out to be. Yeah, tabloids are stupid. Yeah most of our greatest thinkers and innovators have been men. Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, Albert Einstein, etc; we can all point to them and say "look how great men are!"

However, we must resist the temptation to say that their success is somehow detached from or devoid of historical and cultural context. It's safe to say that for most of human history (literally until the 1960s at the earliest), women were in no position to be as innovative or educated as their male counterparts. Even now, decades after we thought we had achieved equality, wealth and power are not neatly dividing 50/50 the way -some- people think it should. And that's most likely because men and women don't behave the same way.

Biology and evolutionary psychology are huge contributors to the spectrum of human behavior, but surely even someone who hates SJWs must admit that socialization affects us in a meaningful and non-arbitrary way. I believe there are fundamental differences between males and females, but I also believe that society has widened that gap.

Attached: 1519523489157.png (2000x2000, 2.4M)

contd

It's easy to point at women and say "If you don't get a STEM degree it's your own damn fault!" But there's a measure of social/historical context that you're ignoring if you believe that we exist as fully self-determined peoples. No man or woman lives without a broad context of socioeconomic influences, and even if we were completely free of our political history, we might never be free of our genetic history.

Point being, women may yet have a ways to go before they fully internalize the competitive and innovative nature that men have strived for for centuries, but that in and of itself doesn't make them useless or inferior by any means.

Attached: 1519140621037.png (627x715, 208K)

maybe she's getting no activity because she's just sitting around looking annoyed?

>even if we were completely free of our political history
Impossible without the elimination of our culture. Gender roles and expectations for the behavior of both sexes, the way relationships are expected to go, etc. are all deeply intertwined with culture and media. There's really no way to change this because there's no incentive for it to change. Why would women suddenly need to be competitive or develop value? Why would men start developing more emotional skills? It goes against what people are taught is "feminine" and "masculine", and some of that is indeed even genetic.

In our society, women really have no reason to develop value in the way men are - because for the latter it's a matter of finding a good mate - women would probably be far more prone to doing this if men judged them for it.

Let them have their thing, if they're incompetent, they're not gonna get anywhere, anyways.

You just made up a lot of shit and presents it as facts.

ITT society's outcasts and losers rant about the other gender. Not realizing that they will stay forever alone with that attitude. You get something back for everything you give. Kindness and self confidence are the key to meeting new people.

That pic made me kek so hard I'm probably gonna get fired now.

you're just becomng redpilled. don't fight with it

But I've fucked several women and make almost six figures....

Then start caring about productive things and create something. You are a grown up then, I presume? Start acting like one. Are you improving yourself in any way by ranting about women? There are many self absorbed people in this world. Men and women. The trick is to find the good ones. Try to make friends often and find a good women in that way. The typical dating games of this world are flooded with desperate people. The 'I want to marry for the wedding, not for marriage' kind of people.
I strongly believe that outgoing people who constantly work on themselves will one day find their 'soul mate'.

I'm not the OP and this isn't about dating for me. This is about socializing with women in general (which I don't mind because I don't listen and pay attention 80% of the time) and working with them. It's so tiresome. I feel like an adult having to fake excitement, like when a mommy or daddy acts all surprised with big eyes when their kid comes up with something that is 100% uninteresting and irrelevant. And the constant complaining. So tiresome.

It's okay to dislike other people. Just let meetings with the people like that cool down a bit. Maybe they will be more interested when you meet less often. Sometimes life just moves in different ways for different people. Kids do that to people of course.

>So what's the issue?
The issue is, what do you do if you hold this knowledge. How does it affect your decision making. Imagine a political party run by mostly women, targeted at women with feminist policies comes into power. Can you trust them on issues like immigration?

What happens in daily conversation, through which a person's underlying worldview is revealed. Believing this sort of thing is deeply politically incorrect and has been proven to have massive risks to your professional life etc.

>I don't believe they are. Does that mean that women are causing the "doom of western civilization" as you put it?
The 'doom of Western civilization' is a result of the Radical Left ideology of the absolute virtue of 'Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity' being propagated through social and legislative fiat. The process can be very readily broken down and clearly understood.

As a quick example, consider this statement: "The idea that objectivity is best reached only through rational thought is a specifically Western and masculine way of thinking- one that we challenge throughout the book". This is from a widely used textbook used in tertiary humanities courses.

Consider pic related. This is *peer reviewed* and published in *an academic journal*.
This is the kind of paradigm in which the core of the RadLeft movement operates.
This is the kind of thinking instilled in students' minds, and subsequently finds its way into tertiary-qualified positions all over society.

Attached: screen-shot-2017-05-19-at-11-47-21-am.png (799x427, 78K)

But I have to talk to them every day at work, I work with these women.....

I feel like my second job is being an actor. It's so fake.

>However, we must resist the temptation to say that their success is somehow detached from or devoid of historical and cultural context. It's safe to say that for most of human history (literally until the 1960s at the earliest), women were in no position to be as innovative or educated as their male counterparts. Even now, decades after we thought we had achieved equality, wealth and power are not neatly dividing 50/50 the way -some- people think it should.

>It's easy to point at women and say "If you don't get a STEM degree it's your own damn fault!" But there's a measure of social/historical context that you're ignoring if you believe that we exist as fully self-determined peoples.
I would contend that the measure is of diminished effect, enough.
We live in a society that is hyperindividualistic, and in an age where almost all the knowledge in the world is at your fingertips. You can pursue damn near any interest you want.
No one told basement dwellers to plunge themselves into technological study. In fact, most would have faced considerable social pressure to do otherwisr and other things. No one tells women that tabloids are a good thing, and that they should support it. And yet it continues. Snapchat, an overwhelmingly female-used app, tailors itself as any free market enterprise does, to market demands. Long existant in the app has been a near unrelated e-magazine function, which is basically a tabloid.

Regarding social context - if you explore YouTube and consider the [relatively few] female creators focussing on technical and complex subjects, no one is discouraging them. The women are excited; the men are impressed. Everyone has a good time all around. The same goes for survival/bushcraft/nature-engineering related content.

And then, I'm sure you've heard the 'Scandinavia' argument by now.

We're not fully self-determined, but at this stage, we're self-determined *enough* for natural tendencies to reveal themselves.

Attached: C63w5VwW0AETE1b.jpg (513x579, 102K)

By all means, disprove or discredit what I said. I'm not afraid.

lol
Just watch for yourself op. None of the women here can refute anything you say, only try and shame you into silence.
See how, without fail, they always try to accuse you of being a virgin, because their entire existence revolves around their vagina and it's the only tool they ever think about, need or use. This is why they hardly ever lead or create or innovate, and instead focus their lives around socialising as much as possible. Every part of their body and mind revolves solely around making babies.

Attached: bjcejxl1acpy.jpg (520x588, 121K)

>women may yet have a ways to go before they fully internalize the competitive and innovative nature
Do you know what nature means in a context like this? Your nature is constantly there. You can't wipe it out with tyranny. That is why rape, murder, etc, is still a thing. Women in Scandinavia doesn't innovate more than women in China. They simply don't make the same decisions as men when they're free to choose, no stigma or pressure involved.

>at this stage, we're self-determined *enough* for natural tendencies to reveal themselves

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying, but the rate of change we're experiencing in society is unprecedented. It's changing to profoundly and so quickly that we shouldn't be looking for natural tendencies to justify our behavior. I don't deny that natural tendencies exist, mind you, but rather that the confluence of forces that make a person who they are is rapidly increasing in complexity.

We're exposed to more ideas, more experiences, and more relationships than at any other point in the history of our species. Some of those may be frivolous or otherwise spurious, but that further complicates the way our genetics are expressed through behavior.

On average men gravitate toward more technical careers than women... so far.

This "thing" we're doing that we call our society has not been around long enough (the rise of the internet to today) and is changing too unpredictably for us to definitively say that men and women are "naturally" this way or that way and nothing can change that. Something can change it, and it looks like something -is- changing it.

Attached: mT8OjNA.jpg (665x1024, 132K)

Do you realize that your pic is valid exemple of how society is shaping men and women through education ? It even begin when you are a child. Look at the difference between toys aimed at girls and toys aimed at boys. Look at what is considered a proper game for boys, and a proper game for girls. You are litterally blaming women and hailing men for a lifelong social conditionment they had little control over.

Women in Scandanavia are still not valued for what they accomplish compared to men, who are solely judged on that. You can't say that nurture is stripped away there either. They are free to choose but have no reason to innovate - unlike men (who yes, are naturally more competitive). I'm not saying biology isn't a factor - but I'm rather saying that culture is far more than "giving people a fair choice". I'm not saying we should strip nurture away (in fact I think that'd be horrible), but if we were to do so, we'd have to completely change the structure of the family, society, the way people see relationships, etc. Because it's all related to why women just don't end up caring about innovation or developing their own skills.

>Your nature is constantly there.
>You can't wipe it out with tyranny.

But it can be changed over time. No tyranny necessary.

I'm saying that the differences between men and women have been historically reinforced by society, and simply removing the "old" structure doesn't suddenly give us a "new" structure.

Some people seem to think that removing every barrier to entry for a women to become an engineer will dramatically increase the number of female engineers. That has not happened, and I don't believe that's because there are still barriers that we simply overlooked, but rather that there's more at play here than socialization and changing -that- will take a lot longer than we first thought.

Sounds like you need more Peterson in your life

youtube.com/watch?v=LSXEHsYf8uQ

Do you lead? Sounds to me like you mostly only complain about others. Also, I'm a dude. I'm just not a child. How ridiculous you are, warning others about women. Know thy enemy, am I right?

This is the problem with you people. You think society is some all-powerful Supernatural Force that rules over Humanity and controls all of our thoughts and actions. You're never willing to see the obvious fact that society IS humanity. We all shape it, it doesn't shape us.

We were dumb cave dwelling monkeys long before anything close to society developed and guess what? Men were still dominant, leaders, explorers, hunters. Women were still passive, followers, home dwellers, care givers.

You act like society is an alien, and one day it just came down to earth and declared "Men must act like this, and women like this" and everyone was just forced to obey. You're obsessed and convinced with this idea that if you could just change society, everything and everyone would change with it. But you're wrong. We shape society, the other way around. It developed naturally overtime based on the way humans naturally are. There was no coordinated conspiracy by any force to decide what the rules of society would be and how it would control everyone like you're convinced there is.

>Do you realize that your pic is valid exemple of how society is shaping men and women through education ?

I did in fact consider the interpretation that you relate, when looking at that picture.

However, I think you're missing a fundamental principle, which I referred to in : We live in a free market-capitalist society.

Companies looking to make money will tailor their products to what customers will buy.
There is no sense for them to invest time and money into creating a product that's completely ill-suited to what their target demographics want.

The topics on the boys and girls' magazines are there, because that's what boys and girls respectively will buy.

Attached: 1514688336021.jpg (1932x2481, 2.13M)

>because that's what boys and girls respectively will buy.
not the guy you're replying to, but while this is completely true - it doesn't imply that there aren't clear indicators of what men and womens' roles in society are already - to influence this. I'm not saying there aren't biological influences for interests, but the socialization can't be stripped away by arguing with the free market or legal freedoms. It's all intimately tied to the social and family structure as well.

In terms of level of skill and innovation also, this tells us pretty much nothing. Even if (which they probably are imho) girls are more attracted to social and emotional things, they should still make decent leaders and seek some ambitions. I'd argue that the only reason there's not many of them like this is because doing so doesn't help their chances at reproduction with a good partner.

>Men were still dominant, leaders, explorers, hunters. Women were still passive, followers, home dwellers, care givers.
I dare you to provide some proof of that. I double dog dare you you fucking faggot.

>You're obsessed and convinced with this idea that if you could just change society, everything and everyone would change with it.
>But you're wrong.
>We shape society

You've played yourself. You just contradicted the fuck out of yourself. I bet you feel pretty fucking stupid now.

Yes, we shape society. No one was ever denying that. In fact that's what motivates us to CONTINUE TO SHAPE SOCIETY.

Just because something "developed naturally" doesn't make it perfect.

>Women in Scandanavia are still not valued for what they accomplish compared to men
That is fucking bullshit, they get front page coverage for doing memes. The 5 most powerful politicians in Norway are women. And guess what? It has never been a bigger shit show, they even admitted it on national television, themselves. Never seen more instability since the post-war times.

>I dare you to provide some proof of that. I double dog dare you you fucking faggot
I remember a time when it was conservatives who would deny basic science and biology, but now liberals do it to. What sad times.

Whatever, you can try to sell GI Joes to girls and barbies to boys until you're blue in the face (and red in the bank) but you'll never succeed. Much less magically make women suddenly stop being obsessed with their gossip and social lives above all else. I can say with 100% confidence that women will never, EVER, achieve even a fraction of the success at leading, creating and innovating that men do. Cause not only are they mostly not capable, they don't even want to try.

You're never going to make little girls dream about someday growing up to be a powerful successful billionaire president rather than simply dreaming of growing up to be really beautiful and marrying a man who's a powerful successful billionaire president.

>"lookism is a social construct, you know"
>"men are into breasts because of the media"
>*Nazz or Daisy Ridley with crossed arms.jpg*

I love how we've become so infested with losers that virgin is a trigger word on this site now

I love how women, even in the middle of being called out how they don't know how to argue in anyway but calling people virgins, still continue to do nothing but try and call people virgins.

Like shouldn't really be any wonder you never accomplish anything?

It also says a lot about the maturity of this site in the past few years that the most biting insult you losers can think of has gone from "retarded faggot" to "woman"

What is wrong with being a virgin in the first place? I see women constantly trying to insult men with that line. Not even taking into consideration that it's an ad hominem.

Protip, it's not woman using virgin as an insult

I was talking about irl. I remember them doing it to people they didn't like in high school.

You must be at least 18 years old to use this site. If you are and still care about what happened in high school you should seriously evaluate what you're doing with your life

I'm 24, I've seen it outside of clubs, too. When there is an argument and both parties are irritated.

Women were also hunter gatherers. It's theorised one fo the reasons woman can see more of a variation of shades of colours than men dates back to caveman times where they would gather berries and be able to spot which were poisonous/bad by the different shades

>If you are and still care about what happened in high school you should seriously evaluate what you're doing with your life
Not that guy but I find myself in that rut. I know school means nothing in the long run but I'm just stuck on the idea that your teen years shape you and being put in the loser spot during that time has fucked me and my confidence. I just can't get past it. I think about people from those times. The "cool" kids. And I'm just stuck thinking of all the fun and teen sex they had while I was relegated as a loser just because I was who I was

If you stop growing as a person at any point in your life you might as well die. I'm 26 and looking back even a year ago I'm blown away at how much I've changed.
Are you gonna spend the rest of your life pining over the past or make the effort to improve your future?

Women (I'm generalizing for sake of argument) don't do shit. As in creating new structure. They get involved in existing social structures and fight for relevance and attention that way. And they strive to infiltrate any interesting niche activity that guys create between them. Look at sports, video games, car fanatics. While there are the occasional women with actual interest in growing the activity itself, most are there because of the group dynamic. And the weird part is the less interested or capable they are in the activity the more vocal their attempts to hide and disguise it. They will be the first to evangelize said activity.

Aren't you special. I hope the next growth you experience is a tumor.

Do you hate dogs because they bark?
Do you hate babies because they cry?
Does it make sense then to hate women for being irrational, vengeful petty, manipulative and demanding?

>that picture
If you think shitty gossip magazines have anything of value to give, you're a moron and it's no wonder youd think in stupid ultimatums

Well duh men do the best and worst things in society
The only reason we are so violent is because you needed violent men around to be safe 1000 years ago, you don't get to get rid of us now because it's no longer convenient

>Do you hate dogs because they bark?
yes
>Do you hate babies because they cry?
yes

Why will they buy it ? Partly because their parents, and their friends, and their environnment has educated them to do so. Basic mimetism. You probably know how harsh people can be when you try a different from society.
I didn't take it into acount in my last post but there is also the children factor. Women are incentivized (I would even say pressured) to make babies. They have a limited time to do so, and the younger they do it, the easiest and the healthiest for them it will be. Now add to this fact than women often have to raise said baby, often while there husband is at work, and that they often do the majority of the chores, and you can really fuck-up some studies and career. Do you know the proverb: "every successful man has a successful housewife behind him" ? That's because he couldn't have achieved all those great things if he had to do his share of chores all day. And it was obviously worse before the industrial Revolution, it is not by luck that feminism took off around that time.

Have you ever seen the iq curves for men and women?
Men are more likely to be geniuses, and more likely to be retards. It's like that with many things, the extremes are usually dominated by men, and we only celebrate the good extremes.

>society developped naturally.
And it organised like this because men were physically more powerful than women, and women do give birth and are highly vulnerable during pregnancy.
Now, if you can beat up women, but not the other way around, and these women, have to rely on somebody, like you, during pregnancy, it is extremely easy to establish dominance then naturalize it, saying that "women are naturally inferior". That's only true if all you value is physical strengh, which maybe was actually the way our ancestors came up with this.

>That's only true if all you value is physical strength
I value intelligence most actually, where men are also better.

>I value intelligence most actually, where men are also better.

Not , but, data is clear that in terms of intelligence, men and women are the same (barring statistical spread). The difference is interests - men seem to be more interested in intellectual things, and women, not as much. So men end up developing their intellects more.

It's like a scenario where everyone has the same muscle mass. But only some people really like exercising and do it a bunch, so they become more fit.

End result is practically the same though. Imagine you have a heavy labor job, and have to pay everyone the same. If you had the choice, are you going to choose the sedentary people, or the people that are already fit?

Attached: tumblr_luw410jfcJ1qbaxlqo1_400.gif (269x255, 414K)

are you even close to these men who do cool stuff? probably not

While I do agree with you that a shocking amount of women out there are walking stereotypes, I don't wholeheartedly believe that there are no women doing anything of substance. It's just a shame that most women are more about promoting their bodies rather than their minds, and then have the audacity to talk about how women are only treated as sexual objects. It really depends on who and where you're looking, but the amount of normie men doing something worthwhile over the amount of normie women just showing off is a little shocking.

>using the term SJW
>thinking that tabloids are for anyone other than 60 year old grandmas
>thinking that western civilization is crumbling because girls like make-up sometimes
>co-opting other men's accomplishments as your own
>pretending that you used to be a feminist

I don't even know where to start

and also this

>The difference is interests - men seem to be more interested in intellectual things, and women, not as much.

That's something that was culturally instilled in nearly all cultures across the world for thousands of years. Women were only allowed to work and go to post-secondary school and make their own lives other than being stay at home moms in the last handful of generations - so of course they're not all immediately scientists and engineers.

>That's something that was culturally instilled in nearly all cultures across the world for thousands of years
Wow, what a crazy coincident all of those different just randomly wound up doing that for no reason. It couldn't possibly be the case that that's simply the natural order of things. Nope, no chance. We all know culture is a separate magical entity we all have to follow, but if someone just chose to say "No be this way now " everyone would just have to follow and all the scientists and CEOs and politicians would be women over night.

Social media has made it worse for women, really. There's so much more "competition" and I think most women are naturally, consciously or not, fighting to make themselves look attractive not only because society has taught them that's where most of their self worth lies, but also biologically because they're fighting the baby clock and need a life partner before they're dried up.

I see more and more women these days saying they don't want kids but I'm not sure how true that really is. I think deep down they'll want to reproduce. Almost all of us do.

social structure and gender roles aren't constant across cultures, you illiterate fuck.

Don't act like women were ever given the same opportunities as men when it comes to the "good" jobs. They were actively told "But sweetheart, you're just a pretty face. You can't do this." It's only in the last 50 or so years that more and more opportunities have been created for women and we're actively seeing the effects of it now. But there are still women alive from that time who still have that old mentality and push it onto their daughters. It's going to be 100 years before we see any substantial change

Yeah but women's incompetence sure is.

Our society won't exist 100 years from now if we keep pushing women into positions of power.

>guys women's is bad for society
>goddamn it why is this male run society falling apart?
Shitty people exist everywhere dude. Shitty women leaders, and male ones as well. The gender doesn't matter. Its the plans they have that do. Now back to Jow Forums with ye.

>women's incompetence sure is.
is it? the women that end up as leaders because they deserve it do just fine. pushing women into leadership isn't going to make them better leaders. they need to be motivated in similar ways as men by culture and society, which they are not - which is why so few of them are good leaders or innovators.

For every vapid cheerleader girl, there's a waste-of-space basement dweller or dumbass frat boy. Do you look at a stupid man and go "all men are worthless"? Why do you do the same thing to stupid women?
Do you think that every single man is BASE jumping or building rockets while women are shopping and reading People?

>inb4 "but all women are stupid :^)"
They really aren't. Your worldview is not going to get you very far in life.

not him but
>display decent sense of humanity during time of crisis
>showing minor display of defiance to regime thats essentially handcuffed
>wow women talking
>wow they make up about half the population and earned about half the medal

i can see it. sorry you cant

> why is this male run Society falling apart?
Are you daft? I just explained it's because we keep giving women more power. Women can't be trusted with power. When they get it, all the use it for is to recklessly indulge their most basic instincts with no regard for conserving resources for future problems. They destroy the family unit that forms the support structure for any stable society. Transform the legal system into a joke where irrational feelings trump logic and facts. Do much the same to the education system. Like seriously, women start becoming the majority of college students, and suddenly colleges become glorified adult daycare centers that exist solely for partying and relationships, leaving us with generations of incompetent adults who can't handle real life. Strip away the rights of the people for the sake of their own personal easily hurt feelings. Open the borders to foreign invaders.

This kind of thing has happened to many civilizations in the past. Were trapped in a cycle of men building civilization, women complaining that they want to be important too, men foolishly letting women try steering the wheel, women crashing and burning everything down, and then men building a new civilization From the Ashes.

Your ass must be sore from spewing out shit all the time, I encourage you to seek whatever type of help you need to improve your life. Once you get past all the jealous anger I guarantee it will improve bro.

Attached: 1522108426144.jpg (537x534, 75K)

What an absolutely pathetic response.

The main reason why is because men are hardwired to stick out (to increase chances of mates) and women are hardwired to fit in (provides best survival rate for her and child)

This is why men are the majority of creators and explorers and why women are better at social areas of work.

You kind of understand half the issue at least. True, you can't be given success. Success can only ever be earned, "success" that is simply given to someone is merely a show to make the person think they've accomplished something when they actually haven't.

You either refuse or aren't able to see other things. Like the fact that women mostly just don't like having to earn things. They very much love and want to just be given fake success. Their only concern is being able to get anybody who calls out the fakeness arrested, or public censured, or otherwise silenced and unable to tell her she might have only been given that success for being a woman.

When's the last time you saw a million women marching down the street screaming and holding up signs talking about how they as women need to work harder and improve themselves to succeed? Never. All they do is blame their problem on someone else and threaten to keep screaming until somebody gives them what they want. Like you're doing right now, with the way you continuously refuse to accept that humans shape society, not the other way around. Nobody encourages men and boys to be daring, take risks, and strive for success. They just simply are that way. And girls are the opposite. Society does nothing but encourage girls and tell them they're wonderful and can do anything, and guess what? They still aren't doing anything because that's just the way they are. Blame society until you're blue in the face, it won't change anything. Maybe if instead of going out just scream about how it's all someone else's fault in some big protest every other week, women went out start businesses maybe they wouldn't have to cry about their made up pay gap. Maybe if they stayed inside and fiddled with a computer or some mechanical parts they could become the next great inventor who changes the world, instead of going out to their protests to complain that there aren't enough women in STEM.

Oh but those things would take work.

Testosterone increases risk taking in males, and estrogen and its derivatives increase anxiety making females generally more cautious. These come with trade-offs which are obvious when you just look at things like gambling and you will see that the extreme ends are much more populated with males than females. Granted risk taking is only part of the story to most social/cultural differences but you can see how it might play a factor in certain behaviors. Take stem fields for example, a common gender distribution will reveal that there are way more males in the field but women have a higher average than the men. Why would there be less women in stems if there average is higher? Well its because the stupid ones dropped out. Women are much more likely to stop when they start getting Cs and will opt out for a safer career path. Males are more willing to risk failing and stick with it. Similarly a women might take one look at a "scary" differential equations and avoid stems altogether even though they could probably handle it, while males are more willing to accept challenges. So, basically the end result is that there is not as many women in stems field and its the really smart ones that are left. This causes there average to go up. On the other hand, there are a lot of stupid males that barely survived that drag the male average down.

>Somebody convince me that I'm wrong about all this.
guis real world scary nd hard. telll me how2 think k

>You either refuse or aren't able to see other things. Like the fact that women mostly just don't like having to earn things.
But I do understand and totally agree with this. I just think it's largely socialized - as they have no reason to do this. Men are judged on status, women are not. In fact society would have to be more harsh on women and not give them free passes, for them to ever need to develop value. Women are given value by society literally by existing/having kids and secondarily by their looks.

> They still aren't doing anything because that's just the way they are.
There's no way to know if that's due to biology or just being socialized to be useless. And I don't think this can be "fixed" like the other people ITT. It would require a re-structuring of society to a ridiculous level.

>Women are given value by society literally by existing/having kids and secondarily by their looks.
you have that completely fucking backwards and you know it. kys fucklord. men pursue women to fuck them based off their looks and women then 'trick' the man into staying long term by whatever means then procreation comes after. you NEVER fucking hear men say "wow she's given birth and produced a human! so fucking hot man"

congrats on your star thread!
i feel same, like women are shit, tho we are told they are better. is it crab-communism? is it just different values "valued"? is it that you are a genius, and most people are kinda monkeyish? is it a T-shot in late pregnancy, or E-mind through a whole life? who is better, conformists, or ex-viduals?
i wish, for you, my friend, it was as simple as women's tabloids.
...as a woman, i do.

You’re not wrong, but you’re also not right. There is a reason patriarchy existed for so long. It’s exactly like the division of labor. Women are better at some things, a men at others. Women are not less intelligent than men, they’re just not that kind of achievers that push the civilization forward. If you talk about inventions. They do another very important thing. At least, they have been doing for a very long time. Caring about the future generations. And you should not belittle that. That’s just as important as working or inventing stuff. Then you can make an argument that current women are not the caretakers they should be, but that is another whole conversation. I think you should focus on harmful ideology rather than on women themselves that are perfectly functional as human beings. Maybe, misguided in the modern age.

>congrats on your star thread!
Yes, I am in fact generally happy with this thread. It did not become an echo-chamber of women-hating.. nor a criclejerk[circlepoke?] of feminist litany. There is an actual debate/discussion with many angles and ideas presented.

The cynic in me would have me believe that actually, the very uttering of the topic would be outlawed with essentially capital punishment if certain relevant ideologies held power over this domain...

But let's not end on a sour note, and instead appreciate the fact that both sides came to the table here, with generally sensible speech

It's a testament to the reasonableness of Jow Forums, imo.

Attached: CvJoqCOWEAAjCXb.jpg (600x751, 147K)

>"wow she's given birth and produced a human! so fucking hot man"
You're confusing "value given by society" with "value given by men for selecting a mate". Men do select based on ability to have and care for kids btw, but my point was that in our society, women are given value just by default. There's something "wrong" with a woman if she doesn't want to stay home and have kids - at least that's how it was traditionally. But even today, the idea that women are somehow inherently valuable while men are not, is still there.

You never hear "damn she's so accomplished and alpha, i wish she'd let me impregnate her" from most men. That's closer to the point I was trying to make. And the only reason women "trick" men into staying is because at least traditionally, they need men for support. And they largely still do, because they don't end up going for high-pay jobs to be able to support a family.

>what a pathetic response
Okay.
>male run society
>only males at the top
>falls apart
>DAMN WOMEN HOW DARE THEY BE APART OF SOCIETY THEM PICKING APPLES OF THE TREES CAUSED EVERYTHING TO COLLAPSE!!!
You're logic is retarded. Only someone bitter and miserable will blame one gender no matter what. I feel sorry for you to an extent.

Attached: 1521522689434.jpg (493x449, 43K)

>Women earn more degrees
And how many of these degrees are for useless liberal arts subjects?

>Any of these things
>Impressive
Oh man, you don't even understand what OP is talking about if you think shit like sports matters in this discussion.

Women have been told for centuries that they can't or shouldn't and daughters have picked that up as you say "by osmosis". The women who have done things have been largely sidelined and overlooked. To be taken seriously they largely needed to have a man in the lead position. Harvard astronomers took credit for the discoveries of the women who analyzed and measured early astronomy photos. See the movie "Hidden Figures" - women were the "computers" who did the math behind astronomy and space launches. Hedy Lamarr, 1940's actress who also invented spread spectrum technology that is essential to Wi-fi today. 3 STEM fields are now female dominated - Healthcare (including veterinary medicine), Botany and Statistics. Consider Neil DeGrasse Tyson's comments. youtube.com/watch?v=z7ihNLEDiuM and fastcompany.com/3044934/why-are-these-3-stem-fields-dominated-by-women and space.com/34675-harvard-computers.html and women-inventors.com/Hedy-Lammar.asp