A woman (also girl, gril, gurl, femoid or succubus; [tranny](tranny.md) girl being called [t-girl](tgirl.md), [trap](trap.md), [femboy](femboy.md), fake girl or [mtf](mtf.md)) is one of two genders (sexes) of humans, the other one being [man](man.md). Women are [cute](cute.md) (sometimes) but notoriously bad at [programming](programming.mg), [math](math.md) and [technology](technology.md): in the field they usually "work" on [bullshit](bullshit.md) (and mostly [harmful](harmful.md)) positions such as "diversity department", [marketing](marketing.md), "[HR](human_resources.md)", [UI](ui.md)/[user experience](ux.md), or as a [token](token.md) girl for media. If they get close to actual technology, their highest "skills" are mostly limited to casual "[coding](coding.md)" (which itself is a below-average form of [programming](programming.md)) in a baby language such as [Python](python.md), [Javascript](javascript.md) or [Rust](rust.md). Mostly they are just hired for quotas and make coffee for men who do the real work (until TV cameras appear). Don't let yourself be fooled by the propaganda, women have always been bad with tech.
**Even mainstream science acknowledges women are dumber than men**: even the extremely politically correct [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) states TODAY in the article on human brain that male brain is on average larger in volume (even when corrected for the overall body size) AND that there is correlation between volume and intelligence: this undeniably implies women are dumber. On average male brain weights 10% more than woman's and has 16% more brain cells. The Guinness book of 1987 states the average male brain weight being 1424 grams and that of a female being 1242 grams; the averages both grow with time quite quickly so nowadays the numbers will be higher in both sexes, though the average of men grows faster. The heaviest recorded brain belonged to a man (2049 grams), while the lightest belonged to a woman (1096 grams). Heaviest woman brain weighted 1565 grams, only a little more than men's average. [IQ](iq.md)/intelligence measured by various tests has been consistently significantly lower for women than for men, e.g. the paper named *Sex differences in intelligence and brain size: A paradox resolved* found a 4 point difference, noting that in some problems such as 3D spatial rotations males score even 11 points higher average.
Historically women have been privileged over men -- while men had to [work](work.md) their asses off, go to [wars](war.md), explore and hunt for food, women often weren't even supposed to work, they could stay at home, chill while guarding the fire and playing with children -- this is becoming less and less so with [capitalism](capitalism.md) which aims to simply enslave everyone, nowadays mostly through the [feminist](feminism.md) cult that brainwashed women to desire the same slavery as men. Statistically women live about 5 years longer lives than men because they don't have to worry and stress so much.
Women also can't drive, operate machines, they can't compare even to the worst men in sports, both physical and mental such as [chess](chess.md). Women have to have separate leagues and more relaxed rules, e.g. the title Woman Grand Master (WGM) in chess has far lower requirements to obtain than regular Grand Master (GM). (According to [Elo](elo.md) rating the best woman chess player in history would have only 8% chance of winning against current best male who would have 48% chance of winning). On the International Mathematical Olympiad only 43 out of 1338 medals were obtained by females. There are too many funny cases and video compilations of women facing men in sports (watch them before they're censored lol), e.g. the infamous Vaevictis female "progaming" team or the [football](football.md) match between the US national women team (probably the best women team in the world) vs some random under 15 years old boy's team which of course the women team lost. Of course there are arguments that worse performance of women in mental sports is caused culturally; women aren't led so much to playing chess, therefore there are fewer women in chess and so the probability of a good woman player appearing is lower. This may be partially true even though genetic factors seem at least equally important and it may equally be true that not so many women play chess simply because they're not naturally good at it; nevertheless the fact that women are generally worse at chess than men stands, regardless of its cause -- a randomly picked men will probably be better at chess than a randomly picked woman, and that's what matters in the end. Also if women are displaced from chess by culture, then what is the area they are displaced to? If women are as capable as men, then for any area dominated by men there should be an area equally dominated by women, however we see that anywhere men face women men win big time, even in the woman activities such as cooking. It makes sense from the evolutionary standpoint, women simply evolved to take care of children, guard fire and save resource consumption by being only as strong as necessarily required for this task, while men had to be stronger and smarter to do the hard job of providing food and protection.
Now because today's brainwashed reader will see this as "[sexism](sexism.md)", let us remind ourselves that this is completely OK. Women are weaker, but in a [good society](less_retarded_society.md) this doesn't matter as in a good society people don't have to compete or prove their usefulness, everyone is loved equally, weak or strong. The issue here is not pointing out our differences but perpetuating a [shitty society](capitalism.md).
Of course even though rare, well performing women may statistically appear. The issue is women are very often involved with a cult such as the [feminists](feminism.md) who waste their effort on [fighting](fight_culture.md) men instead of focusing on study and creation of real technology, and on actually loving it. They don't see technology as a beautiful field of art and science, they see it as a battlefield, a political tool to be weaponized to achieve social status, revenge on society etc., which spoils any rare specimen of a capable woman. Even capable women can't seem to understand the pure joy of [programming](programming.md), the love of creation for its own sake, they think more in terms of "learning to COOODE will get me new followers on social networks" etc. Woman mentality is biologically very different from men mentality, a woman is normally not capable of true, deep and passionate love, woman only thinks in terms of benefit, golddigging etc. (which is understandable from evolutionary point of view as women had to ensure choosing a good father for their offspring); men, even if cheating, normally tend towards deep life-long love relationships, be it with women or art. You will never find a virgin basement dweller programmer or [demoscene](demoscene.md) programmer of female sex which isn't a poser, a [hacker](hacking.md) who is happy existing in a world of his own programs without the need for approval or external reward, a woman will likely never be able to understand this.
Supposed "achievements" of women after circa 2010 can't be taken seriously, [propaganda](propaganda.md) has started to tryhard and invent and overrate achievements and basically just steal achievements of men and hand them over to women. There are [token](token.md) women inserted on [soyentific](soyence.md) positions etc. (lol just watch any recent [NASA](nasa.md) mission broadcast, there is always a woman inserted in front of the camera).
Of course, [LRS](lrs.md) loves all living beings equally, even women. In order to truly love someone we have to be aware of their true nature so that we can truly love them, despite all imperfections.
**Is there even anything women are better at than men?** Well, women seem for example more peaceful or at least less violent on average (feminism of course sees this as a "weakness" and tries to change it), though they seem to be e.g. more passive-aggressive. Nevertheless there have been a few successful queens in history, women can sometimes perhaps be good in representative roles (and other simple chair-sitting jobs). They have also evolved to perform the tasks of housekeeping and care taking at which they may excel (still it seems that if men fully focus on a specific tasks, they will beat women, for example the best cooks in the world are men). Sometimes women may be preferable exactly for not being as "rough" as men, e.g. as singers, psychologists, massage therapists, sex workers etc.
Finding famous women capable in technology is almost a futile task. One of the most famous women of [modern](modern.md) tech, even though more an entrepreneur than engineer, was [Elizabeth Holmes](elizabeth_holmes.md) who, to the feminists' dismay, turned out to be a complete fraud and is now facing criminal charges. [Grace Hopper](grace_hopper) (not "grass hopper" lol) is a woman actually worth mentioning for her contribution to programming languages, though the contribution is pretty weak. [Ada Lovelace](ada_lovelace.md) cited by the feminist propaganda as the "first programmer" also didn't actually do anything besides scribbling a note about a computer completely designed by a man. This just shows how desperate the feminist attempts at finding capable women in tech are. Then there are also some individuals who just contributed to the downfall of the technology who are, in terms of gender, at least partially on the woman side, but their actual classification is actually pretty debatable -- these are monstrosities with pink hair who invented such [cancer](cancer.md) as [COCs](coc.md) and are not even worth mentioning.
In the related field of [free culture](free_culture.md) there is a notable woman, [Nina Paley](nina_paley.md), that has actually done some nice things for the promotion of free culture and also standing against the [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) fascism by publishing a series of comics with a character named Jenndra Identitty, a parody of fascist trannies.
In [science](science.md) at wide we occasionally find a capable woman, for example Marie Curie.
Here is a comparison of men and women in numbers that are still possible to be found in already highly censored sources. Of course, the numbers aren't necessarily absolutely up to date, at the time or reading they may be slightly outdated, also keep in mind that in the future such comparisons may become much less objective due to [SJW](sjw.md) forces -- e.g. because of [trans](tranny.md) athletes in sports we may see diminishing differences between measurements of performance of men and "women" because what in the future will be called women will be just men pretending to be women.
Note: It is guaranteed that [soyentific](soyence.md) BIGBRAINS will start screeching "MISLEADING STATISTICSSSSSSS NON PEER REVIEWED". Three things: firstly chill your balls, this isn't a scientific paper, just a fun comparison of some numbers. Secondly fuck you, we don't fancy peer censorship. Thirdly we try to be benevolent and not choose stats in a biased way (we don't even have to) but it is not easy to find better statistics, e.g. one might argue it could be better to compare averages or medians rather than bests -- indeed, but it's impossible to find average performance of all women in a population in a specific sport discipline, taking the best performer is simply easier and still gives some idea. So we simply include what we have. Thirdly any statistics is a simplification and can be seen as misleading by those who dislike it.
