2024-11-17 15:37:32 +01:00

40 KiB

Raw Blame History

<3 Woman <3

{ Hello, if you're offended scroll down, I actually apologize to some women at the end :D ~drummyfish }

A woman (also girl, gril, gurl, femoid, toilet, wimminz, the weaker sex, the dumber sex or succubus; tranny girl being called t-girl, troon, trap, femboy, fake girl or mtf) is one of two genders (sexes) of humans, the other one being man -- traditionally woman is defined as that who was born with a vagina. Women are the weaker sex, they are cute (sometimes) but notoriously bad at programming, math and technology: in the field they usually "work" on bullshit (and mostly harmful) positions such as "diversity department", marketing, "HR", UI/user experience, or as a token girl for media. If they get close to actual technology, their highest "skills" are mostly limited to casual "coding" (which itself is a below-average form of programming) in a baby language such as Python, Javascript or Rust. 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 -- whenever you see a woman "engineer", quickly go hide somewhere, something's gonna fall on your head. If you see a woman driver in a bus, rather wait for the next one. Indeed, very rarely a somewhat skilled woman may appear (we're not saying women can't be capable, just that they rarely are).

The symbol for woman is a circle with cross at its bottom (Unicode U+2640). Women mostly like pink color and similar colors like red and purple.

{ I would like to say there are a few women and girls I hold dear, whom I admire and who are in many aspects much better beings than myself and most men I known. ~drummyfish }

Even mainstream science acknowledges women are dumber than men: even the extremely politically correct Wikipedia 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. Men also have faster reaction times. 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/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 in every culture women have been privileged over men, and they still are: being a woman means playing life on low difficult (women for example commit suicides much less often, much less frequently end up being homeless and so on) -- while men always had to work their asses off, go to wars, 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 which aims to simply enslave everyone, nowadays mostly through the feminist cult that brainwashed women to desire the same slavery as men. In case of emergencies it's always been the rule to save women and children first, in wars women and children were oftentimes spared in mass executions. Thanks to being smaller, thinner and lighter women need fewer calories to survive, i.e. men have to pay more money just for staying alive (Does anyone care about this inequality gap? Of course not). Statistically women live about 6 years longer lives than men because they have easier and less stressful life, they don't have to work as hard and they can obtain privileges (such as free food and better healthcare) just with a flirty smile. Woman make much more money by prostitution than men, why don't evil women discriminate against poor men this way? While feminists are furious about wage gaps in professions where men make more money than women, none gives a single damn about these opposite kinds of inequality gaps which just confirms what everyone already knows: feminists don't care about equality, they simply care about women. Women also have the huge social privilege of being able to to have sex and/or get a partner at any time with no effort and/or trade sex (or even just mere company) for things and services -- this happens very often, see e.g. the GamerGate scandal which basically revealed that women "developers" were fucking game reviewers to push promotion of their "games", i.e. here we see that women oppress men not just by treating them as mere sexual objects but also by having good games made by men be rejected in favor of bad games made by women by the power of sex. Being a woman means playing life on very low difficulty, you can have anything you want at any time. Man on the other hand won't get sex unless he's a billionaire or at least 2 meters tall, no matter how smart, nice of physically fit he is. For a woman to get sex it's enough to just ask while not weighting two tons, that's literally how easy it is. It is proven that taller men have more sexual partners which means women are discriminating against short men: why are women so evil and practice body shaming? Didn't they want equality or something?

Fun fact: in Czechia it is literally a folk tradition to beat women on Easter, for which the woman must give the man who beat her a treat, it's called Pomlazka, or Easter whip in English, look it up :D

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. 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 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 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. There may be a small part of truth to this but in the end it's most definitely just an excuse to cover up the fact that women don't play chess (and aren't encouraged to do so) simply because they're not naturally good at it. Do chimpanzees lack the ability to read because we "oppress" them by not installing bookshelves into their zoo exhibits? Take a look at Jews: they are a minority, one that's been under extremely heavy oppression, even that of genocide, and they still managed to grab the highest ranks in society and basically win the capitalist game. Nowadays, in 21st century, women are no longer oppressed, on the contrary they now get social privileges, encouragement, all the handholding and support -- where are the female chess geniuses then? Where are the female Einsteins? Not even with all the support in the world can they get to the level of men (note that eventually, out of necessity, feminism WILL resort to crippling men and forging data to make it look like females beat men, but that will indeed be just pure lies). And still, no matter the cause, the fact simply stands that women are generally worse than men at mental activities -- a randomly picked man 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. "It's cultural" is the absolute top argument of feminists, they say women are just as smart and capable as men and that men, since we lived in caves, somehow plotted to oppress women and keep it a secret from them that they're so smart -- if it's "cultural", then also ask why is the culture like this? Culture is shaped by needs, necessities, by reality; if we know one thing about evolution then it's that it OPTIMIZES everything to maximum -- if women give birth to children and then feed them, they won't go hunting with men, and if they don't go hunting, it's unnecessary to give them big brains capable of quick, precise decisions which require more nutrition, just as it's inefficient to give them big, strong bodies that need more food -- this is evolution, that's the reality and that's what formed the culture. 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 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.

{ I actually enjoy women football, mostly for its comedic value. ~drummyfish }

Now because today's brainwashed reader will see this as "sexism", let us remind ourselves that this is completely OK. Women are weaker, but in a good society 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.

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 EYEEES, 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.

In the book Flatland women are mere line segments, the most primitive of two dimensional shapes, and it's made clear they are very dumb and dangerous, so society just treats them as beings without any notable intellect; a passage from the book for example cites that "it was decreed by the Chief Circle that, since women are deficient in reason but abundant in emotion, they ought no longer to be treated as rational, nor receive any mental education". The book is full of gems like that :D In the Bible the first woman, Eve, was made by God from the rib of Adam, the first man, to make him company, however that turned out to be a mistake as Eve then pissed off God by eating forbidden fruit (and making Adam eat it too) and got herself and Adam kicked out paradise -- for this she doomed all women to suffer regular monthly bleeding.

Of course even though rare, well performing women may statistically appear (though they will practically never reach the skill of the best men). That's great, such rare specimen could do great things. The issue is such women (as all others) are very often involved with a cult such as the feminists who waste their effort on fighting 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, 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 programmer of female sex which isn't a poser, a hacker 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. This seems to be evolutionary given, but perhaps in a better culture these effects could be suppressed.

A woman in emergency situations even presents a deadly danger: not only do women have significantly lower reaction times (source e.g. Aditya Jain et al. 2015), but in sudden emergency situations women always start to freak out and panic, they start screaming, running around and can't control themselves -- this is because, again, genetically men are programmed to deal with danger, men stay calm in a crisis, while women are programmed to rather signal the danger and run away. This can be seen basically in any video of any accident. For this reason having a woman in charge during critical missions such as space walks is a huge, life threatening risk. Of course we aren't even talking about their permanent mental instability due to the menstruation cycle -- anyone who lived with a woman for longer period of time knows this -- a woman is constantly on emotional rollercoaster, one day she's crying, the next day she's not talking to you, another day she's manic and hyperactive, so putting woman in charge of a critical long term mission is literally playing lottery with human lives, it's like placing a huge, stressful burden of responsibility on someone mentally ill, unpredictable and highly imbalanced.

Supposed "achievements" of women after circa 2010 can't be taken seriously, propaganda has started to tryhard and invent and overrate achievements and basically just steal achievements of men and hand them over to women (not that there were any generally significant achievement post 2010 though). Remember, by now things such as ghostwriting are absolutely normal -- a rich guy without any writing talent just pays someone to write for him while giving the authorship credit to the rich guy, it's legal and completely common, money can nowadays buy anything, including talent or making lie into truth, so very soon there will be (or possibly there already are) things like men who are paid to secretly make scientific research that will then be handed over to some woman because politics just needs women with achievements which they can't reach themselves, it's just natural development under capitalism. At the moment there are many token women inserted on soyentific positions etc. (lol just watch any recent NASA mission broadcast, there is always a woman inserted right in front of the camera).

Of course, LRS 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, some say they're for example better at multitasking, i.e. doing multiple things at once, though it gets questioned a lot, but it would possibly make some sense evolutionary speaking, men had to usually focus sharply on one thing while women had to keep an eye on kids, maintaining fire, cooking, cleaning, talking with other women and watching out for danger -- all at once. Women could also find their "strength" exactly in the fact that they're DIFFERENT from men, they seem for example more peaceful or at least less violent on average (although feminism of course views this as a "weakness" and already diminished this moral advantage women used to possess), however they seem to be e.g. more passive-aggressive and love to plot behind the scenes. A man may fall victim to his overly competitive nature or "pride", being less competitive will sometimes be an advantage -- a truly smart woman will know this and won't try to mimic men, she will try to be good at being woman. There have been a few successful queens in history, women can sometimes perhaps be good in representative roles (and other simple chair-sitting jobs), in being a "symbol", which doesn't require much of any skill (a statue of a god can do the same job really). They have also evolved to perform the tasks of housekeeping and care taking at which they may excel, but still it seems that if men fully focus on a specific task, they will beat women at anything, for example the best cooks in the world are men (in Japan it is common knowledge that sushi made by women is not as good because their hands are too warm). Sometimes women may be preferable exactly for not being as "rough" as men, e.g. as singers, therapists, sex workers etc. There were also some good English female writers actually, like Agatha Christie and J. K. Rowling, though that's still pretty weak compared to Hemingway, Goethe, Tolkien, Tolstoy, Shakespeare, Dickens, Dostoevsky etcetc.

Can women be allowed in technology? Well yes, sure, we don't forbid anyone from doing anything. Can a dog become a writer? Maybe -- it'll be awesome when he does, but we shouldn't encourage dogs to become writers or see lack of dog writers as a problem. In any case we need fewer women doing important intellectual tasks, forcing women to do tasks vital for functioning of society has led to those tasks being done poorly and society is getting destroyed, it's not fun anymore, the world is literally collapsing because women were forced to do important tasks for political reasons, it is now time to prioritize saving society before political correctness. Just admit women are dumb, stop forcing women everywhere and the numbers will get back to healthy levels. In general something like 1 woman for 1000 men doing intellectual task such as programming, writing or science is about the ratio we are probably looking for.

Also women aren't funny for some reason (with one possible exception of Ashley Jones) -- somehow it's very very difficult to find a woman with comedic talent and if very rarely at least a somewhat funny girl appears, it seems she has to be extremely ugly for it to work. It's hard to say if it's because of their low intelligence or due to the natural public perception of women (e.g. when a woman is attempting comedy it's still very hard for a man to not just focus on imagining sex with her).

lol http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com also https://encyclopediadramatica.gay/Woman :D

How to deal with being a woman? Well, just as you deal with not being born Einstein, Phelps or Kasparov. It's fine to be anyone, there is no need to fight or compete, just try to be a good human and live a fulfilling life, you can create a lot of good. As a woman you can do for example the following:

Charity sex: Give people sex for free, you'll make a lot of them happy.
Oppose feminism: Women opposing feminism are based.
Try to get smart: You can get quite smart even as a woman -- at least if you're white, Jewish or Asian -- you won't match men but that doesn't matter, you can still get quite smart.
Just do woman things: Be just a normal woman, learn cooking, cleaning and so on.
Don't try to be an imperfect man. Be a perfect woman.
Just chill and enjoy your privileges, find a man who will feed you so that you don't have to work, have kids, be a good mother, just be cool.
...

Women are also disallowed in sumo because of their menstrual shit or something.

Men Vs Women In Numbers

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 forces -- e.g. because of trans 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 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.

measure	men	women	comment
height: average (EU)	178 cm	165 cm
height: greatest	273 cm (Wadlow)	257 cm (Jinlian)
weight: average (EU)	85 kg	70 kg
weight: greatest	442 kg (Minnoch)	385 kg (Carnemoll)
brain: avg. weight	1424 g	1242 g
brain: heaviest	2049 g	1565 g
avg. reaction time	230 ms	244 ms	(Aditya Jain et al. 2015)
muscle/mass avg.	42%	32%
life span: avg. (EU)	75 years	81 years
life span: greatest	116 y. (Kimura)	122 y. (Calment)	top 10 oldest people ever are all W
homeless ratio	~75%	~25%	W is much less likely to be homeless
suicides / 100K	11.15	2.86	M die by suicide nearly 4x as often
average IQ (US 1993)	101.8	98.8	in some areas M score even 11 higher
Fields medals (2022)	62	2	W had 0 until 2014
car property damage	3.7 / million	4.2 / million	(Massie et al. 1997)
200m outdoor WR	19.90s (Bolt)	21.34s (G-Joyner)	best W ranks lower than #5769 among M
60m indoor WR	6.34s (Coleman)	6.92s (Privalova)	best W ranks lower than #3858 among M
raw deadlift WR	460kg (Magnusson)	305kg (Swanson)	best M lifts about 50% more weight
marathon	2:01 (Kipchoge)	2:14 (Kosgei)	best W ranks #3935 among men
100m swim WR	46.8s (Popovici)	51.7s (Sjostrom)	best W ranks lower than #602 among M
chess best Elo	2882 (Carlsen)	2735 (Polgar)	best W win 8%, lose 48%, draw 44%
go best Elo	3862 (Jinseo)	3424 (Choi Jeong)	best W ranks #68, M win prob.: 92%
speedcubing WR	3.47s (Du)	4.44 (Sebastien)	best W ranks #16 among M
Starcr. 2 best Elo	3556 (Serral)	2679 (Scarlett)	best M has ~80% win chance against W
holding breath WR	24:37 (Sobat)	18:32m (Meyer)	Ms have ~35% greater lung capacity

How To Get Women

Don't!

see also incel/volcel

Any girl that has ever seen the Internet is spoiled beyond grave, avoid these for any cost. If you seriously want to live with a woman, it's best to consider diving into the jungle and find some half ape indigenous girl not touched by capitalism yet, those may be unironically cool.

Jerking off is the easiest solution to satisfying needs connected to fucking women. If you absolutely HAVE to get laid, save up for a prostitute, that's the easiest way and most importantly won't ruin your life. Or decide to become gay, that may make matters much easier. You may also potentially try to hit on some REAL ugly girl that's literally desperate for sex, but remember it has to be the ugliest, fattest landwhale that you've ever seen, it's not enough to just find a 3/10, that's still a league too high for you that will reject you unless you pay her. Also consider that if you don't pay for sex, there is a 50% chance you will randomly get sued for rape sometime during the following 30 year period. If you want a girlfriend, then rather don't. The sad truth is that to make a woman actually "love" you, as much as one is capable of doing so, you HAVE TO be an enormously evil ass that will beat her to near death, abuse her, rape her and regularly cheat on her -- that's how it is and that's what every man has to learn the hard way -- as we know, the older generation's experience cannot be communicated by words, the young generation always thinks it is somehow different and will never listen. Sadly this is simply how it is -- even if you think you have found the "special one", the one that's different, the intelligent introverted one that's nice and friendly to you, nope, she is still a woman, she won't love you unless you're a murderer dickass beating her daily (NOTE: we don't advocate any violence, our advice here is to simply avoid women). If you think getting close to her, being nice and listening to her will make her love you, you're going to hit a brick wall very hard -- this road only ever leads to a friendzone 100% of the times, you will end up carrying her purse while she's shopping without her letting you touch her ever. If you just want a nonsexual girl friend, then it's fine, but you will never make a girlfriend this way. This is not the girl's fault, she is programmed like that, blaming the girl here would be like blaming a child for overeating on candy or blaming a cat for torturing birds for fun; and remember, THE GIRL SUFFERS TOO, she is literally attracted only to those who will abuse her, it is her curse. If anyone's to blame for your suffering, it is you for being so extremely naive -- always remember you are playing with fire. You may still get a girl to stay with you or even marry you and have kids if you have something that will make her want to be with you despite not loving you, which may include being enormously rich, being so braindead to have million subscribers on YouTube, having an enormous 1 meter long dick or literally giving up all dignity and succumbing to being her lifelong slave dog doing literally everything she says when she says it, but that will still get you at most 4/10 and is probably not worth it. { From my experience this also goes for trans girls somehow, so tough luck. Maybe it's so even for gay men in the woman role. ~drummyfish } All in all rather avoid all of this and pay for a prostitute, buy some sex toys, watch porn and stay happy <3

Notable Women In History

Finding famous women capable in technology is almost a futile task. One of the most famous women of modern tech, even though more an entrepreneur than engineer, was Elizabeth Holmes who, to the feminists' dismay, turned out to be a complete fraud and is now facing criminal charges. 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 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 as COCs and are not even worth mentioning. In general if there is some famous woman in science, technology or a similar field, she is not famous for extraordinary achievements but rather for the fact that she is a woman in that field -- like the horse who could count was also not famous for being able to count but for being able to count while being a horse -- again, this just confirms women are much less capable than men and seeing a woman with abilities comparable to those of men is something special.

In the related field of free culture there is a notable woman, Nina Paley, that has actually done some nice things for the promotion of free culture and also standing against the pseudoleftist fascism by publishing a series of comics with a character named Jenndra Identitty, a parody of fascist trannies. Some rare specimen of women openly oppose feminism -- these are the truly based women.

{ Maybe not historically notable but one based Czech woman, at least in terms of her art, is Magdalena Vozicka who wrote an amazing book about how to survive the end of civilization, I loved it so much, this woman truly earned my respect. Also huge thanks goes to my female friend who gifted me the book. ~drummyfish }

Here is a list of almost all historically notable women (this is NOT cherrypicked, it's randomly sampled):

Ada Lovelace: female nobleman who didn't have to work, once scribbled a note to a notebook about a computer made by a man. For this she enjoys endless glory among feminists.
Agatha Christie: one of the most famous UK writers, wrote books such as Ten Little Niggers, one day went nuts and ran somewhere into woods.
Anne Frank: famous for having been killed by Nazis while being young.
Beth Harmon: female who was as good at chess as men, also a completely fictional character who never existed.
Elizabeth II: queen of England, managed to stay alive for a long time.
Elizabeth Holmes: cringe and creepy psychopath who obsessively tried to imitate Steve Jobs, started a huge corporation and manipulated uncountable people into a huge fraud, sentenced to 11 years in jail.
Girlvinyl: started Encyclopedia Dramatica, then went 180 degrees, tried to kill it, failed.
Emily Wilding Davison: injured an innocent horse by jumping under it in a protest.
Eve of the Bible: achieved probably the biggest fuck up in history, she did the single one thing she was forbidden from doing without even gaining much benefit from it, she ate some kind of God forbidden fruit, enraged God and doomed all people who will ever live to be banished from paradise :D
Helen of Troy: caused the Troy war.
Hermione Granger: smart girl, also fictional (these two attributes seem to go together in girls). { I kinda liked Luna Lovegood though <3 ~drummyfish }
Jack The Ripper's victims: prostitutes famous for being killed by a famous serial killer.
J. K. Rowling: woman who wrote 7 books on a toilet paper because she didn't have money for normal paper, pretty impressive.
Joan of Arc: militant nationalist fascist, basically Christian jihadist.
Judit Polgar: best non-fictional female chess player that at her peak managed the incredible feat of ranking #56 in the world while actually existing.
Marie Curie: this one was actually probably quite skilled and based, won two Nobel Prizes (at the time when there were no diversity quotas so it actually counts), though she probably stole most of her work from her husband. She was quite ugly tho.
Lisa Nowak: a female astronaut, military pilot, i.e. someone who would ideally be among those with highest mental stability and reliability, who nonetheless one day went on a rage frenzy over a sexual affair with some army chad, pepper sprayed some other bitch and was subsequently charged with attempted murder after weapons were found in her car... women... :D
Lisa Simpson: smart girl, fictional.
Mary: famous for giving birth to the most famous man in history. Also for being virgin -- this is so unbelievable in fact that some branches of Christianity refuse to believe Mary was a virgin despite still believing in miracles like resurrecting dead.
Miss Marple: smart woman detective, fictional.
Mother Teresa: maybe also based? TODO: research
Nasim Aghdam: Tried to do mass shooting in YouTube headquarters but only managed to kill herself.
Olga Hepnarova: ran over 8 people with a truck, later executed.
Sharon Stone: showed vagina on camera.
Sophia Loren: famous for big boobs.
Yoko Ono: destroyed the most famous music band in history.
...

{ People ask me why I'm bashing women so much here :D Basically for fun, but the main reason is probably feminism -- the more they try to make women godlike, the more fun I make of them. So blame feminists basically. But it is definitely true women are dumb and less skilled at everything, propaganda just tries to cover the truth so I uncover it here again. ~drummyfish }

Drummyfish's Official Apologies To Based Women

The following is written by drummyfish, the author of this article.

Previously in the article I have stated the following:

{ Please, PLEASE show me a truly based woman and I'll unironically mention her here with an apology. I want to see her, I want them to exist, I'm hoping this article may even "motivate" some girls to become based and prove me wrong, at least by being a very rare exception. But remember, she has to be really, really based, so based that what she does would be LRS-kind of based even if she was a man, okay? Basically it would have to be something like an antifeminist, anti LGBT but pacifist anarchist girl who does charity sex for fun (while not being a complete landwhale), makes selfless public domain porn and programs minimalist CC0 software in C or something, and also mustn't wear any makeup or have any tattoos. If it's not close to this ideal, don't even mention her. ~drummyfish }

This section will be dedicated to me fulfilling my promise. Please note that me acknowledging a based woman doesn't automatically come with me approving of everything she does, I just think she is very, VERY cool in many ways and I admit she impressed me to a very high level. Also keep in mind a based woman may later on turn into unbased woman, just like Luke Smith did for instance.

I have found the website of Ashley Jones. She immediately caught my attention, I reckon she is truly based for reasons now stated in her own article :-) Ashley Jones, I apologize to you, please stay awesome and inspire more women to be as based as you are <3 --drummyfish. No, the words don't come out of my penis, they come out of my heart. Please stay cool.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE Ashley don't fuck it up please, stay our Internet queen don't get shitty pretty please! (LRS note for those who are retarded: yes, this is a bit of a hyperbole, don't unironically make cults of personalities. But Ashley is officially a mini queen of the Internetz now.)

Now I also remembered one female psychologist who helped me very much <3 I apologize to her too.

I also realized babushkas and old grandmas in general are often based, they just come from the better times when women were just normal women and in general people were better.

Your name here? Let me know if you come by another candidate for a based woman :)

{ NOTE: Someone may ask what do I even apologize for if I claim that this article is not offensive? Well, let's say I may still want to apologize for example for underestimating someone, even if that is not my mistake at all (making thousands of imprecise judgments every day is an inevitable part of everyone's life). I don't think anything in the article is wrong and that I SHOULD apologize, but I may still want to do it to make someone feel better, EVEN if I don't feel guilty or obliged to. It's as if I decide to pay someone money even if I'm not obliged to, or more like saying "I feel and share your pain". So don't mistake this for me negating the article, I am just trying to express sadness over the fact that due to feminism a based woman was grouped together with the average ones, and also to show I really am friendly and will acknowledge truth when I'm confronted with it. ~drummyfish }

40 KiB Raw Blame History