Update
This commit is contained in:
parent
50af01815e
commit
8b1d7a4381
30 changed files with 1893 additions and 1799 deletions
2
woman.md
2
woman.md
|
@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ Historically women have been privileged over men -- while men had to [work](work
|
|||
|
||||
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. LMAO there is even a video of 1 skinny boy beating 9 women in boxing. 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 most likely 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 and fashion design. Feminists will say that men simply oppress women everywhere, but this just means that women are dominated by men everywhere, which means they are more skilled and capable at everything, there is no way out -- yes, antelope are oppressed by lions, but it's because lions are stronger than antelopes. Here we simply argue that women are weaker than men, not that oppressing women is okay -- it isn't. Furthermore if women were weaker but not by that much, we should statistically see at least occasional dominance by a woman, but we practically don't, it's really almost impossible to find a single such case in history, which indicates women are VERY SIGNIFICANTLY weaker, i.e. not something we negligible we could just ignore. Being a woman correlates to losing to a man almost perfectly, it is a great predictor, basically as strong as can appear in science. It makes sense from the evolutionary standpoint as well, 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.
|
||||
|
||||
{ I actually enjoy women football, mostly for its comedic value. ~drummyfish }
|
||||
|
||||
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).
|
||||
|
||||
A woman does super stupid shit like pay all her (or her husband's) life savings for silicon breast implants, then wear a dress that basically consist solely of cleavage but then when a man makes eye contact with her breasts during conversation she's like "WHY U NOT LOOOKING IN MY EYEEEEEEEES, STOP RAAAAPIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!". Beware -- a woman possesses the dangerous weapon of seduction which she plentifully makes use of, e.g. for gold digging. A woman is a master of pretense. A wisdom as old as mankind itself states that "you cannot live with a woman, and you cannot live without her" -- this is true, though the latter is much easier to do, especially lately. A woman doesn't think logically, she thinks emotionally (menstruation and their hormone levels jumping all over the place further make this yet much worse), so what's true or false depends on how she feels at the moment OR in the future via so called reverse causality: a woman saying "yes" can actually mean "no" if 20 years later she decides it actually meant "no" -- an action in the future determines the past. Physicists weren't able to explain this phenomenon yet; in fact no male is probably ever capable of understanding a woman.
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue