Should women have the right to vote? (No betas allowed, genuine

>>1836126
Yes.

>>1836126
No
Simply because women are emotional by default.
Have you ever had a political conversation with a woman? It's all about "muh poor people" "muh minorities".
And sometimes their good intentions just make it worse, for example, raising the minimum wage

Yes.

What would make you think their sexual organs have an impact on their competence when it comes to electing politicians?

>>1836153
Millions of men also support the policies you listed.

>>1836161
The political divide in men is roughly 50/50, with a slight lean to the right
The political divide in women is overwhelmingly left-wing/socialist

>>1836126
>Should women have the right to vote?
No.

ONLY women should have the right to vote.

>>1836165
Yeah. Millions of men think the same way, like I said.

>>1836168
This is just as dumb.

>>1836171
Yes but men are much better at making up their own minds, where as women will conform to the status quo, which is not necessarily bad since that is part of their purpose as a woman. But in terms of being good voters, they are awful.
For example, my family is not big on politics, we never discuss it at home and if i had to guess id say they'd be slightly left of centre.
However I would be much more right wing, this is because i went out of my way to learn about politics and make up my own mind on what works.
Find me a woman who's political stance isnt identical to her family's/boyfriend's/ the mainstream etc.
I don't particularly care if someone is far left as fuck, what bothers me is when they hold these views simply because the people around them do.
And that is how women vote
They were massive supporters of segregation when it was the mainstream, and now they're massive supporters of liberalism (in the American and European sense) because it's the mainstream

>>1836190
Seems like a massive proof by example fallacy.

>>1836126
Yes, if you allow people to vote there is no logical reason not to allow women to do so.

>>1836153
>women are emotional by default

This is a meme. Men are just as emotional as women and their decision making is just as clouded by it. If you can't see that then you are probably overly emotional yourself.

>>1836193
Eh maybe. The behaviour patterns between sexes are there every election, and in everyday life. You don't need me to tell you about women, you know plenty of them
>>1836202
This is just blatantly untrue lad, when's the last time you saw a man cry because someone shouted at him?

>>1836222
The women I know are free thinkers and don't just kowtow to the majority.

>>1836222
>This is just blatantly untrue lad, when's the last time you saw a man cry because someone shouted at him?
Men are just as affected emotionally, but express themselves differently. That's literally it; the expressions, not the emotions, are different.

File: 1476527211929.png (110KB, 286x217px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 286x217px

>>1836227
>the women i know are free thinkers
Lad please

>>1836233
Not an argument, sexist.

>>1836231
Let's assume this is true.
The expressions aren't "different" they're repressed. This would show that men are better at controlling their own emotions

>>1836239
No, men get pissed at trivial things that a woman wouldn't, and get more violent because of it. For example, a man is more likely to punch you for stepping on your shoes than a woman is. The woman is better at controlling that.

File: 1422465590251.jpg (25KB, 228x221px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 228x221px

>>1836235
>come into a thread about the difference between sexes
>proceed to get offended

>>1836241
This is just blatantly wrong. I've seen plenty of women throw drinks and start fights with other women because they've had their shoes stepped on

>>1836242
I'm not offended. Sexism has a definition, and I'm using the word correctly. I'm also stating that you don't have an argument.
>>1836244
So? Men are more violent and hair-trigger.

Arguing that emotion invalidates your political opinion is not only dangerous but very short sighted, assuming all men are logic driven animals is a gargantuan fallacy.

And since there's only one autist (that's self proclaimed right leaning) arguing against woman vote, he should take a better look at history. Fascism and Nazism were bred out of pure emotions, we men are as emotional as women, just different amounts of chemicals intercating within our brains, more testosterone doesn't imply a better vote, if that were the case blacks would make the best voters, and they are the ones that push all the shit listed as emotional and useless by your own words (welfare, raising minimum wage, etc.)

So either make a better argument or make it clear who should be allowed to vote within males too, because we are as emotional as women.

>>1836126
No because everything is muh feels to them no really.

>>1836153

Let's suppose that women are more emotional than men, for the sake of the argument. Why should that be a reason to not allow them to vote? First of all, general trends tell us nothing about an individual's voting choices. They may have a reasoned case to support the candidate of their choice - or not. Second, it's an arbitrary reason distinct from objective qualifiers such as age or citizenship. Third, even if they overwhelmingly vote for the candidates whose policies are more detrimental to the country's benefit, then that should not disqualify them from voting. The right to vote doesn't imply the duty to vote for the objectively better candidate.

Women pay taxes, have jobs, own property and get educations so I don't see why not.

>>1836239
Repressing emotions isn't controlling them...

>>1836246
>men are more violent
And? Women are constantly sabotaging each other in the social arena, it is a rarity for a man to get into a fight.
>>1836247
>assuming all men are logic driven animals
No, im stating that they're simply more logic driven than women
>Nazism
>right wing
"no"
Testosterone is not the only difference between the minds of men and women, and blacks vote that way becuase it is within their own best interest. They vote for what is best for the group, if they viewed this group as being all Americans, they make excellent voters

And next time atleast have the courtesy to actually link me when you reply
>>1836254
>the right to vote doesn't imply the duty to vote for the objectively better candidate
Democracy was a mistake
>>1836262
Yes it is

>>1836264
>And? Women are constantly sabotaging each other in the social arena, it is a rarity for a man to get into a fight.
And the point is, women are better at controlling their violent urges than men are. Try to keep up.

>>1836126
Yes, but only if they own land. Same with men desu.

>>1836264
>democracy was a mistake

Then you're laying the issue with democracy itself, not with whether a particular subset of the population ought to be allowed to vote.

ITT: Generalisations upon generalisations

This was doomed from the very beginning.

>>1836276
Well the important thing is you've found a way to feel superior to both sides.

>>1836270
Only in response to you. If you think that having a vote does not come with responsibility, then you shouldn't be allowed to vote either
>>1836276
>muh outliers
If 90% of group A are violent killers, then i can say "Group A are violent killers", would you waste everyone's time by arguing about the 10% who aren't?
>>1836268
Good principle but land is limited and the population has swelled far too much for that to be reliable or economically and environmentally sound. Having a job of 30/40 hours a week or more would be better

>>1836264
You are simply trying to refute democracy, not women vote. That's why I told you which subset of men do you actually think should vote.
Or you could simply state your political preference and cut all the bullshit since you already derrailed the thread.

>>1836287
>trying to refute democracy
Only in response to you since your blatantly disregard for the responsibility that comes with having a vote triggered me.
If you stop replying then this particular part of the discussion goes away, and I'll still be talking about female voters

Donald Trump had run the most emotion-based, least substantial campaign in history and is supported overwhelmingly by men. So where does that leave us?

>>1836294
Jobs and immigration are not "emotion-based". His pride in the US is an emotion yes, but a very useful one.

>>1836300
>Trump supporters have their heads this deep in the sand

>>1836303
Not an argument

>>1836293
I'm not sure with which poster you confused me with, but I was the one addressing chemical levels, logic between sexes, and black vote.

>>1836300
>Jobs and immigration

Which he has no policies about, just emotional pandering.

>>1836285

>If 90% of group A are violent killers, then i can say "Group A are violent killers", would you waste everyone's time by arguing about the 10% who aren't?

How is this "example" even comparable to what we're discussing here? Just because women don't vote the way you want them to, doesn't mean there's something wrong.

>>1836310
>gets into twitter arguments regularly
>is a giant narcissist and shoots back at anyone that insults him
Even ignoring his emotional politics, the guy has a temperament problem

>>1836311
Ahh ok, i thought you were
>>1836254
I'm still not sure which reply is actually yours lad, sorry
>>1836313
Read his website, his policies are there in black and white
>>1836316
You're complaining about generalisations. But when you entire a thread about 50% of the human populace, you will get generalisations or else there will be no discussion at all, just pandering to the "unique individual who doesn't fit this box"
>>1836318
I agree he has a temperament problem and I'd like to see him get it under control, but he doesn't delete 33'000 emails and no one turns up dead when they criticise him
Obviously i have to agree with one candidate more than the other, that candidate is Donald Trump, this doesn't mean that he is the perfect political powerhouse in my eyes. Simply that he's the best of 2 people

>>1836336

But not all women think the same. Nor do they have the same situation in life. The question is inherently flawed, I agree. But knowing that all women couldn't possibly be all lumped together as one collective hive mind makes it impossible to have a proper argument that "all women should be banned from voting".

>>1836285
Which responsibilities? The right to vote is tied to citizenship and reaching a certain age. Citizens have their rights and duties which balance eachother out. The rights aren't additionally burdened except with the prohibition to abuse those rights.

>>1836348
Then we need to look at the behaviour of the majority of female voters and decide upon that, or else we will decide nothing at all
>>1836350
The responsibility to make the best decision for the good of the nation and it's people.
You've taken the right to vote as a given, and so you value it less. This is why I agree with
>>1836268
The right to vote should be earned

>>1836126
ITT: Biology has no effect on the mental facilities between genders because my feelings say so

>>1836371
ITT: I'm going to generalize millions of people and throw individuals under the bus because my feeling say so

>>1836365

Which is something you can't measure. Surely all voters are convinced that their choice is for the good of the country.

If you agree with the idea that only landowners should have the right to vote, then why do you say that this right must be earned? Many landowners inherit their property.

>>1836377
"muh individuals"
Utterly worthless and detrimental to all discussion involving any group of people

>>1836381
I agreed with his principle but stated in my reply to him, that a full time job would be a much better criteria

Yes, but I think you should have to have children and land to vote, why should people who dont even have stake in the country be allowed to vote?

>>1836399
>fuck individual rights
Get out of the West.

File: IMG_0197.png (108KB, 400x381px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 400x381px

>>1836377
Good luck socially constructing this

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2919083/Male-female-brains-really-wired-differently-Study-finds-women-far-affected-emotional-images.html
http://www.medicaldaily.com/study-womens-brains-are-more-sensitive-negative-emotions-react-differently-mens-354226
http://sites.psu.edu/siowfa15/2015/12/04/why-are-women-more-emotional-than-men/
https://www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/456459/Paper-6-Parkins-Gender-and-Emotional-Expressiveness_final.pdf

>>1836401

If that's a decisive criterium then I don't see how that would bar women as a whole from having the vote.

>>1836412

I still don't understand how "women are more emotional" disqualifies them from having a say with how their tax dollars are spent.

>>1836399
Go live in the Middle East then if you hate Western ideas of individualism so much.

>>1836412
Not an argument. Doesn't mean we ban women from voting. The majority of Trump's base is men for fuck's sake.
>inb4 Hillary shill
I hate her too. But Trump is a fucking moron who doesn't know what he's doing.

>>1836423

If you don't pick an extreme in the game of identity politics of the 21st Century people will get confused and attack you, dontchya know?

>>1836419
Cuck confirmed

Western culture is based on Greek, Roman, and Christian culture

None of those allow women to have political or religious voice because it's been plainly obvious from the beginning that they're not fit to make such choices

But of course marxist egalitarianism is definitely a fixture of western culture, right?

>>1836419
>>1836410
>you are different from the group and should be expelled
So individualist

>>1836449
>Anti-X is just as bad as X, so don't even try to do anything
t. superior centrist master race

>>1836126
Yes.You couldn't now reasonably take the vote away from women or anyone else.

>>1836481
Not literally, you dip. If you hate Western values so much, then get out. We won't force you.

>>1836489
I do not hate western values, i simply believe that the group is more important than the individual. This is not inherently anti-west

>>1836423
>people who are genetically incapable of making objective decisions should vote

You heard it here first folks! Let the potatoes vote

I hate both candidates

Trump is a pro-kike shill and Hillary is a Saturday morning cartoon villain

only Men should be allowed Imperium because the right to rule is Olympian and applies only to men. Also there is literally nothing wrong with slavery.

>>1836492
Yes it literally is
>>1836494
Why is it so hard for you to accept that women are humans, /r9k/?

>>1836498
>ayo all humans are equal we should let 9 year old nigerian tribeswomen decide the course of our society.

>>1836501
More false analogies and slippery slopes. You're trying too hard, /r9k/

>>1836498
>the West is one group that holds 1 philosophy
So individualist

>>1836410
>muh liberty!
Named 1 nation or empire through history that was relevant, and prized individual liberty highly.

>>1836502
You know what he's trying to say. People are inherently unequal

>>1836489
Western values =/= egalitarianism

If you told the Athenians and Romans who we let vote now they'd die of laughter

>>1836502
You said women should be allowed to vote because they are humans. So it's not a slippery slope, 9 year olds are humans too.

>>1836504
I'm the one hes arguing with and i can name one
The US, though that is the only one and their ascent into power is purely the result of 2 world wars

>>1836513
Kek, who is egalitarian today if not the west?

>>1836516
Does the U.S really prize liberty? Is it not more of a meme? Does not the U.S state grow larger and larger and more totalitarian by the day?

>>1836504
United States
>>1836513
It's about freedom, not equality
>>1836509
Irrelevant.
>>1836515
Strawman. I said that because you compared women to potatoes and said that they aren't capable of making objective decisions.

File: 2a22f765718f080b9f6a60387290591f3874e17c8a44733d9a0df123c6c1ba64.png (303KB, 1119x966px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1119x966px

No

>>1836523
>i was only shitposting because you shitposted beforehand.

>>1836522
It is extremely hard to say one way or the other, especially due to the change in the political climate in the US, where the second ammendment is constantly under threat.
But i think they have prized individual liberty more than any other nation I'm aware of, throughout their history
>>1836523
>people should be equal
>"but anon people aren't actually equal"
>whether they are actually equal is irrelevant

>>1836528
>people should be equal
>"but anon people aren't actually equal"
>whether they are actually equal is irrelevant
Reply to Thread
I never said it was about equality. It's about allowing women the freedom of representation.

>>1836539
meant for >>1836534

>>1836539
On an equal footing with men
So... equality?

>>1836498
>the Greeks, Romans. and medieval Christians believed everyone should be free to do anything they want with no social or political standards to be upheld

Fuck off

I'm not from /r9k/

They're whiny cucks who believe in equality

I think women are humans, and the best place for them is at home caring for children

>>1836539
Why should we allow women the freedom of representation?

>>1836545
It doesn't matter if it's on par with men. It's about freedom, not equality.
>>1836546
Putting words in my mouth. Stop that.
>>1836552
No taxation without representation.

>>1836516
The US didn't let women vote until the 20th century and this was after centuries of kicking and screaming

>>1836517
>who is marxist today if not China & Vietnam?
Egalitarianism was the final result of a subversion campaign post-WWII

ITT unironic supporters of taxation without representation.

>>1836566
ITT: an unironic opposer of taxation without representation.

>>1836523
>he doesn't know potato means retard

Freedom isn't inherently good

I shudder to think what my sons would do with adult "freedom"

>>1836556
Because they pay tax? Is that your argument?
>>1836563
I think no one is truely marxist, certainly not China, they are capitalist as fuck. Also egalitarianism was the end result of christianity.

>>1836539
...Why?

>>1836575
>I shudder to think what my sons would do with adult "freedom"
More false analogies.
>>1836576
Do you actually think that's not a legitimate argument?

>>1836581
Okay. Should we also not allow men to vote, because there's apparently no reason to?

>>1836566
The founding fathers agreed women shouldn't be represented

And all American men up until 1920

>>1836582
Well, yes. Everyone pays tax on their income, men vote, women don't, i don't see what's wrong with that, you think women should be allowed to vote because they pay tax, but i'm not convinced, what about women who don't work and thus don't pay tax? Do you want men who don't pay tax to not be allowed to vote? I don't get the point. I'm mainly arguing that women are submissive half-persons who shouldn't be allowed to vote for that reason.

>>1836576
Haha no

Women aren't even supposed to TALK in church, and they're supposed to obey without question

>>1836586
I asked why?

Men are logical creatures who pay taxes and naturally have superior facilities for leadership

>>1836598
Are you a Mormon?

>>1836592
And humans used to bang rocks together in caves. Things change.
>>1836593
>men vote, women don't,
No, women vote more than men. Also, I don't know how you'd get through life without paying tax.
>I'm mainly arguing that women are submissive half-persons who shouldn't be allowed to vote for that reason.
Women are people, /r9k/.
>>1836600
/r9k/, men can be incredibly illogical.

File: ancap meme.png (272KB, 525x387px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 525x387px

>>1836607
>"Women are people"

Holy shit that's your entire argument. We're back to the 9yr-old voter logic again.

>>1836613
Categorically, women are literally people. I mean, it's a fact. Not "half-persons". I'm just stating a fact to counteract your obvious falsehood.

>>1836619
Keep going, i'm keking and farting in unison. Tell me some more funny stories, like how women should be in the army or how masculinity is toxic.

>>1836601
Roman Catholic

>>1836619
Just because they're people doesn't mean they should be allowed to vote

>>1836627
You're saying women aren't people, I said they are.
>>1836631
They should vote because they are adults and pay tax.

>>1836628
Alright i just have this theory that egalitarianism evolved from protestantism. So we abandoned our religion but took egalitarianism and human rights in its stead. I'm sure i'm not the originator of this idea, i think i read it somewhere.

>>1836634
>Tadpoles are frogs. Windows are doors. TV-guides are lexicons.

>>1836639
False analogies. Women are people, it's a fact. I don't know what's so hard about this; it's like stating the sky is blue. You're not being an edgetard, you're just being dumb.

>>1836641
Holy shit you've said it five times now
>This level of autism

>>1836646
Autistic people can't see the humanity in others.

I don't know. I think if you pay any sort of taxes you should get to vote.

Men, women, and even those who are under 18 who currently have jobs that are being taxed by the Federal government.

If you don't want them to vote, then just stop taxing them. Problem solved.

Honestly, no.

>>1836650
>The term "humanity" employed in this context
Stirner, deliver us.

>>1836653
Yes, humanity is being employed in this context.

>>1836651
Do you think that a persons vote should count more according to how much that person pays in taxes?

>>1836222
i cry all the time because im a loser

>>1836652
Why?

>>1836665
Empirical evidence. They make poor choices based on emotions.

>>1836668
So do men.

>>1836658

That's a good question. But it would have to be proportional to their income.

Let's say you make $50,000 and pay $25,000 in taxes (yeah that is a bit high but I need it simple for my math).

So you get 50% weight with your vote.

If you make $100,000 and only pay $10,000 in taxes there is 10% weight to your vote.

Maybe that would lead to people paying more taxes so they have heavier weighted votes.

But we don't have to go that far...

I would say you had to pay taxes for most of your adult life after you retire to continue to vote, but if you are young and pay taxes to the Fed then you deserve a say in how they use those taxes.

People who don't pay tax have really should have no say in government as they aren't contributing.

>>1836634
They shouldn't work or pay taxes either

>>1836672
Why not?

>>1836673
Because they're bad for workplace morale and belong at home raising the future generation

>>1836658
Not him but you're strawmanning hard here, there's a difference between "if you pay taxes you can vote" and "you should have votes proportional to your tax burden."

>>1836671
If only those who pay taxes are allowed to vote on what is done with that tax money. And if their influence is relative to the percentage of their income that they pay in taxes. Why should we have a state at all? Why not just let those taxpayers keep their money and decide for themselves what to spend the money on? Why insert a middleman (the state) if he doesn't decide on anything? Fuck

>>1836674
>Because they're bad for workplace morale
How?
> belong at home raising the future generation
Daycares and babysitters

File: 1456430217138.png (536KB, 378x588px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 378x588px

Nobody should have the right to vote.
God save the king.

>>1836681
>We should outsource the raising of our children to a third party because.... No reason! lel

>>1836686
>because.... No reason! lel
Because both parents (or the single parent) has to work. Are you dumb?

>>1836677
It was a legit question. I wasn't trying to nail him. This may surprise you.

>>1836681
They don't take criticism well, they fight among themselves and form groups against other women
>daycares and babysitters
I'd rather have my children seeing their mother everyday than some stranger I'm paying

>>1836682
This.

>>1836689
Who says they both have to work? You?

>>1836692
>They don't take criticism well
Men don't either.
>I'd rather have my children seeing their mother everyday than some stranger I'm paying
It doesn't really matter what you'd rather.

>>1836695
I'm not. You're the one saying one has to stay at home.

>>1836698
>men don't either
It's fairly obvious you've never had a girlfriend, or friends who have girlfriends
>>1836698
Well it does matter what I'd rather because you're asking me aren't you, utter spastic

>>1836699
Well i'm not him, i'm not saying anyone has to do anything. I will now proceed to literally quote you:
>Because both parents (or the single parent) has to work. Are you dumb?
So why the fuck do they both have to work? Let's assume i'm dumb for the sake of this argument.

>>1836705
>It's fairly obvious you've never had a girlfriend, or friends who have girlfriends
Men don't take criticism well either. That's a fact.
>Well it does matter what I'd rather because you're asking me aren't you, utter spastic
No, it matters what the woman would prefer. Not you.
>>1836706
Because they might both need to work to pull in enough to get by.

>>1836636
Nah

The Catholic Church helped ban slavery and "genocide"

>>1836669
Lions are cannibalistic

They're also mammals

Therefore they should vote

After all, humans are occasionally cannibalistic mammals

>>1836710
If you shrink the size of the workforce by having women not work, you have a shortage of labor, making it pay more; meaning only one has to work

>>1836710
>Because they might both need to work to pull in enough to get by.
Explain exactly how this works... A man and a woman have babies, they pay a childcare service to take care of their babies during the day so that the woman doesn't have to, so she can work to pay for the childcare? Or is the childcare payed by taxes ? Taxes paid by said woman?

What if a man and a woman have so many children that they can't pay to support them all on just the mans wage. So the woman takes a job. But now she can't care for her young at home because she's working. There's a logical inconsistency here and your argument is not explaining it.

>>1836710
>caring about what women prefer
Absolutely pathetic

>>1836714
How sad, slavery was baller.

>>1836719
Literally what
>>1836720
Except you're forcing people not to work. Out the window that idea goes.
>>1836724
I don't care what you prefer.

>>1836733
>We can't have laws saying who can't work.

>>1836681
Not him but kiddies brought up by nannies, daycare, and sitters tend to turn out pretty horribly

Like babies fed formula and not titty juice

>>1836739
We do have them. Just not when it apples to adult women.
>>1836741
And children of gay parents end up behaviorally better than children of straight parents.

>>1836698
Why doesn't it matter?

Children need to be nurtured by a mother to turn out well and pairbond

>>1836746
Do you think that working stops the child from seeing their mother at all?

File: images (1).jpg (12KB, 284x177px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 284x177px

>>1836733
>forcing
Hah, if you think I'm going to legislate into law "women cannot work" rather than spend billions of dollars to subversibly change popular culture to make women not work you're a fool.
Go read some Edward Barneys.
Have yourself a "Torch of freedom" you faggoty flapper.

>>1836745
You've won the shitposting award.

>>1836721
Why would a person have kids in the first place if they can't afford to even have someone look after them, if not themselves or their spouse?

Birth control is free

>>1836756
To pass on their bloodline perhaps. Why the fuck do you think?

>>1836755
It's actually true. Look it up.
>>1836754
People aren't necessarily slaves to popular culture.

>>1836759
That's dumb. Who has children willy nilly irresponsibly just because muh bloodline?

>>1836760
Women are complete slaves to popular culture

>>1836766
Not necessarily.

>>1836764
Well, most people.

>>1836768
Not really.

>>1836767
They are.

>>1836771
Not necessarily.

>>1836733
Haha no

You don't just grab someone and forcibly change what they've always believed, we're not Muslims after all

You slowly spread propaganda everywhere and psychological warfare through media and cultural memes as well as shaming people for not agreeing

Most people aren't very deep thinkers

>>1836774
Are natural inclinations overtake our socialization.

>>1836745
Wrong

Children raised by 2 heterosexual parents>Single fathers>Gay men>Single mothers>Lesbians

>>1836781
Our*

>>1836748
Popping every evening to put them to bed isn't very good

>>1836168
>how to ruin a country 101

>>1836785
Who says it has to stop at that? Who says they work on weekends?

>>1836782
Beware his arbitrary definition of "behaviorally better", lel. He might just mean that they become better at gobbling cock or reciting cultural marxist propaganda.

>>1836126
Yes as voting legislation women just as much as it does men.

>>1836790
Not an argument /pol/

>>1836759
You REALLY think some broke trash is thinking "I must continue the legacy of my family...come hither my lover! And let us conceive a new member of the human race."

No

They're thinking "BUSTANUTBUSTANUTBUSTANUTBUSTANUT SKEET SKEET SKEET"

>>1836792
Okay so 5 year olds should get to vote by your logic.

>>1836794
Well yes you are right. But that desire to bust a nut is just your subconscious telling you to pass on your genes, my man.

>>1836773
>muh outliers

>>1836760
Dude

In less than 50 years people worship gays. refuse to accept any gender differences, and allow millions of previously despised foreign barbarians to flood their nations

Women are the overwhelming majority of consumers and media addicts anyway, this is marketing 101 shit

>>1836801
No.
>>1836804
>In less than 50 years people worship gays
Due to growing understanding of gays and the nation becoming freer.
>refuse to accept any gender differences
That's only stupid SJWs, who are the minority.
>and allow millions of previously despised foreign barbarians to flood their nations
Most people agree that this is a bad thing to do.

>>1836165
>The political divide in women is overwhelmingly left-wing/socialist
Not necessarily. Femalw voters historically supported conservative policies such as prohibition. In Germany, women were the strongest supporters of the post-War conservatives while men voted for social democrats.

>>1836156
According to the current polls on the US election, yes.

>>1836823
>prohibition
One of the most anti-male policies ever, that lead to decades of unprecedented organised crime and violence
Fantastic

>>1836247
Fascism and Nazism were leftist movements born from the statist totalitarian fantasy.

>>1836795
No because five year olds aren't developed enough to understand the ramifications of their vote. Women on the other hand are, according to all science, just as capable at this as men.

>>1836235
The thread clearly states no betas

>>1836492
>Collectivist thinking is good
>Collectivist thinking is western
>Collectivist thinking is modern
t. Cryptofascist

No

>>1836842
OP said no betas allowed.

>>1836845
I'm not saying it in offense, only in ridicule. I don't think sexists are evil, I think they're stupid.

>>1836860
>i was just pretending to be retarded

>>1836853
Science has a feminist bias.

>>1836850
>i will endlessly suck Socrates dick
Good for you

>>1836865
If you want to say something I'm literally not saying, then yes.

>>1836842
>I didn't read the laundry list of links above

If you want I'll even dump my folder

>>1836868
I'd rather suck a dick than lick a boot.

Fascists and socialists go home.

>>1836866
Science supports the existence of gender roles.

File: 1465722025462.jpg (122KB, 728x391px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 728x391px

>>1836876
>I'd rather suck a dick
You just lost all credibility

>>1836877
It also says that women are just as smart as men and thus unlike 5 year olds there's no reason not to let them vote.

>>1836866
Quite the opposite actually, and if you try to argue otherwise I'll point out you're on /his/, not on /sci/. In fact, I'd rather people from non STEM courses abstain from meddling on STEM subjects, just as much as STEM fags should refrain from meddling in humanities'.

>>1836879
i'd rather be an intelligent homosexual than be a mindless goosestepping robot.

>>1836680

If you don't like having to pay taxes at all, then you should leave the country and renounce your citizenship.

Though I can't think of a country that doesn't have some taxes. Maybe Somalia the Libertarian beacon in the world.

>>1836879
Dicks look pretty tasty tbqh.

>>1836883
Except STEM informs us of what is literally reality. No philosopher worth their salt would tell you that you should chuck science out the window and believe whatever you feel is true.

>I'd rather people from non STEM courses abstain from meddling on STEM subjects,
Except they don't and it's good that they don't. Philosophy of science is a thing for a reason.

>>1836879
>Talks about collectivism
>Hates cocksuckers
So you're an intolerant collectivist?
Thanks for proving you're a fascist.

>"They don't vote for muh preferred candidate!"
>"I don't agree with the policies they vote for!"
>"Because of these arbitrary qualifiers based on irrelevant generalizations!"

Literally the only arguments being against female suffrage and they're not even reasonable.

>>1836901
Epistemology =/= Science

Arguing about knowledge and how it's aquired isn't the same as pretensing you're qualified for acquiring new knowledge through the scientific method.

>Inb4 angry that he doesn't get to pull the science card when he doesn't even have any qualification on any scientific field

File: RIP.jpg (12KB, 487x432px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 487x432px

>Should women have the right to vote?
No.

Just look at Europe today and soon America.

>>1836914
dumb tripfag.

>>1836902
I am literally a fascist.
What's your point? Fascism is a western ideology

>>1836880
Actually wrong

https://www.google.com/amp/www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/02/sorry-girls-but-the-smartest-people-in-the-world-are-all-men/amp/?client=safari

>>1836922
>Italians
>Western
:^) WE

>>1836930
>Italians
>not western
What

>>1836911
>as pretensing you're qualified for acquiring new knowledge through the scientific method.
I don't, I leave that to more qualified individuals and then consider their discoveries in my world view. Hence why I accept that women are just as smart as men.

Likewise I never said that humanities academics should try and conduct scientific research or vice versa. I said that both subjects are intertwined and you would be a fool to not consider scientific facts in your philosophy.

>>1836126
Are they a political monolith regardless of nation?

If so then they clearly should not.

If not then clearly they should.

>>1836930
Are you retarded?

>>1836928
>smartest people in the world are all men
This is true, men have a greater diversity in IQ distribution. However on average there is little difference as women are more thickly concentrated on what you could call the average.

Otherwise there is little difference in general intelligence.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605000851
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605000887
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605000139
http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/amp-67-2-130.pdf
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222702039_Sex_differences_in_processing_speed_Developmental_effects_in_males_and_females
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188690100040X

Unless you want to limit voting to people above a certain IQ (which would still include some women) there's no reason to think that women are any less capable of voting.

>>1836823
>>1836823
>>1836823

good post

>>1836126

yes, no doubt about it.

>>1836168

low quality bait, lack of success shows it.

>>1836222

>when's the last time you saw a man cry because someone shouted at him?

in the military

>>1836233

>posting facebook tier meme image
>Lad please

shoulda known you're a worthless subhuman, why even bother to reply

>>1836842
>Women on the other hand are, according to all science, just as capable at this as men.
>According to le almighty god of SCIENCE, women are exactly the same as men THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE SHUT UP SHUT UP SCIENCE SCIENCE

>>1836901

>Except STEM informs us of what is literally reality

pretty damn retarded statement

>No philosopher worth their salt would tell you that you should chuck science out the window and believe whatever you feel is true.

haven't laughed this hard in ages

when's the last time you finished a book, kid?

>start with the greeks

and come back in a decade

>>1836928

>safari
>breitbart

Kill Yourself

>>1836888
>You should move to Somalia LOL

I love when this "argument" is presented.

>>1836963

>Actually believing some who cites Breitbart is going to read a single scientific paper in their life

delusional

>>1836930
Holy fuck. Shitpost of the thread award, right here.

File: 1463117938166.jpg (14KB, 288x324px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 288x324px

>>1836983
> women are exactly the same as men
That's not what I said.

I said that women are just as capable at this specific thing i.e voting whereas five year olds are not.

>>1836986
>pretty damn retarded statement
Okay, science is not reality. How did you come to this conclusion.
>when's the last time you finished a book, kid?
Yesterday.
>and come back in a decade

How you start arguing and come back when you're done.

>>1836990
>Attacking the source
Typical marxist
>>1836963
See

>Male and female mean IQs are about equal below the age of 15 but males have a higher mean IQ from age 15 on. The effect of sex differences in IQ is largest at the high extreme of intelligence. Since many of the more prestigious roles in society are associated with high IQ, the lack of female representation in these roles may be partially due to fewer females being competitive at the highest levels.

Women are inferior to men

>>1836996
>I can't read articles but everyone else is retarded

lol

Your emotional outburst speaks for itself

http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/sexdifferences.aspx

>>1837000
>I said that women are just as capable at this specific thing i.e voting
Do you have a single fact, source, or rational argument to back that up or did you just want to shitpost?

>>1837011
They're adult human beings. How is this complicated?

>>1837004
>Women are inferior to men
No, women are inferior to some men. And more likely than not everyone ITT is inferior to those men too.

>>1837011
Actually yes, I'll link you the citations I linked the other guy.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605000851
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605000887
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605000139
http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/amp-67-2-130.pdf
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222702039_Sex_differences_in_processing_speed_Developmental_effects_in_males_and_females
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188690100040X

>strawmen
>anecdotes
>ad homs
>moving the goal posts

ITT is proof that anyone voting on anything is retarded.

If you absolutely HAVE to have voting, make it so that only tax payers can vote, and even then, make them pass a test that demonstrates they have a basic knowledge of history, economics, and politics.

>>1836840
>Centralized authoritarian control
>The state is the highest entity and the citizens all owe fealty to it
>Emphasis on racial and cultural homogeneity
>Using quasi-religious exhortation to direct the people

Any real historian will tell you that you're a retard for using "left wing" and "right wing" in today's sense to retroactively describe historical movements, but you're doubly retarded for looking at Nazism and thinking "left wing."

>>1837015
>le they are human beans argument

>>1837023
How is it unbelievable that adult humans are capable of voting? /r9k/ is fucking retarded, I swear.

>>1837017
>I'll link several studies that all prove men and women are different. But i won't specificy why i linked these in particular or what is noteworthy about them or how they support my argument, that should shut him up.

>>1837018
but that's classist and sexist and probably racist as well.

>>1836998
It's an art.

>>1837034
>I will post clearly biased articles from tabloids or alt-right sites, that will show him

>>1837027
So you really subscribe to the egalitarian fever dream that all humans are equal, and thus equally fit to decide in matters of government?

>>1837046
Well shitposted, i didn't do those things.

>>1837051
No, you retard.

>>1837034
> But i won't specificy why i linked these in particular or what is noteworthy about them or how they support my argument,
I asked for a citation on a specific topic so I assumed it was a given that these sources concern that topic. In case you don't remember that topic was

>I said that women are just as capable at this specific thing i.e voting

And as these studies point out there's little variation in general intelligence across sexes.

>>1837015
LEAVE WOMEN ALOOOONE!

THEY'RE HUMAN BEINGS!

t. Only oldfags will get this

>>1836258
>implying all the above

>>1837058
*You asked

>>1837022
>Deutsche arbeiterpartei
>At the vanguard of early 20th ideological thought
>Literally rebelling against the old order
>Basically a more racist rehash of the same old shit the left had done
>Not left wing
I want you to kill yourself.

>>1837056
Fuck your mother you insolent tittyfucker.

>>1837058
I just read the summary of those studies and they all prove the sexes are different.

>>1837064
You literally have no argument. No good or logical one at least.
>>1837068
Don't get me wrong, II love my mom, but...

>>1837046
>Muh alt right
Opinion immediately discarded.

>>1836126
Yes.

>>1837046
>alt right

Yeah

Damn universities

No human should have the right to vote. The vast majority of humankind is pleb. Without a real knowledge of basics of economic and polity, they will choose retarded shit every time.
That's the paradise of populism, fascism, etc. This kind of governments use emotions to control the mass.

>>1837067
>Literally rebelling against the old order
Except it was literally a reactionary movement that saw the Weimar republic as a perversion of German ideals and wished to restore Germany to a mythical past golden age.

Not to mention being a rebel doesn't make you left wing. If this was the case counter-revolutionaries in the USSR would be left wing. This is equally true for being at the vanguard of something, hence why early Ancaps aren't left wing either.

>>1837074
>breitbait
>university

>>1837076
So why the fuck shouldn't we just let people vote after they've passed a test proving they have a basic knowledge of economics and politics?

>>1837000

>Okay, science is not reality. How did you come to this conclusion.

never did actually. there is not one objective reality. if you don't know about the problem of induction, I'll refer you to

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/induction-problem/

after you're done with that, you'll need a more modern reading to understand the limits of the scientific method, read:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/

glad I could enlighten you

protip:

you look like a complete plebeian when you're avatar fagging as subpar youtube philosophers

>>1837069
> and they all prove the sexes are different.
Different yes. Different at different measures of intelligence both of which are factored into general intelligence.

Which as you should remember is what I was talking about.

>>1837083

>The problem of induction shows there is not one objective reality
>popper being relevant today
You're even worse than the moliboo

>>1837077
>Rebelling against a republic means you are not a leftist.
Brb gonna tell that to all the commies I know, can't have them turn into ebil NAZIS.

>It isn't left wing
"Secular Totalitarian State Uses Proletarian-Focused Populist Rhetoric"
Totally not MUH socialism

>>1837004

>calling me a marxist

pathetic

I don't buy into either of the big ideologies, try again

>on average, women and men are equal
>somehow that makes women inferior

you're reaching, desperately

>>1837010

>posts a source that quotes jensen
>with a quote from 1993

he's been discredited and proven wrong countless times

>>1837095


>iq is all that matters when it comes to voting rights!

kys irl pls

>>1837034

if you lack the attention span to read the fucking ABSTRACT (it means SUMMARY) at the beginning at every study you shouldn't be allowed to post here

please off yourself

>>1837100
>Haha you didn't read all the links i posted so i won the argument.

Seen this tactic in use before...

>>1837067

that's why they were l i t e r a l l y killing communists and socialists in the streets, right?

because they were a leftist party? that's why dissidents died in concentration camps, right?

you're bumfuck retarded, don't ever post on my /his/ again you worthless subhuman

>>1837102
>so i won the argument
not what he said dumbass

>>1837091

how is popper not relevant today? who disproved him? come on, I genuinely wanna know

>>1837106
That's not what i said either, cuntface

>>1837109
Yes, it was, fuckface, you fake quoted him
>>Haha you didn't read all the links i posted so i won the argument.

>>1837099

I never said nor implied that. you seem to have some troubles with your reading comprehension. I don't agree with that statement at all.

>>1837102

I wasnt the one posting the sources though

>WINNING ARGUMENTS ONLINE

hows highschool treating ya?

>>1837108


>how is popper not relevant today?

Because we have move on from falsificationism which has severe problems like not even closely resembling how science has ever worked.

>>1837109

that is quite literally what you said though..?

>>Haha you didn't read all the links i posted so i won the argument.

how many meme arrows do you want, kid?

>>1837114

You post articles on women and men iq being similar as if that matters at all.
Women shouldn't vote for matters other than their IQ.

>>1837112
Well you can go and fuck a goats ass with a metal screwdriver you god damn alley rapist
>>1837114
>hows highschool treating ya?
Better than usual since i left it years ago you underage stay-at-home masturbator.

>>1837079
>I didn't read any of the citations because I'm retarded

KYS

>>1837115

>popper is irrelevant today because falsificationism is wrong

yeah, but HOW is it wrong? can you elaborate on this or are you actually clueless?

come on dude.. I really am curious, so lay it down. and if you're unable to (big surprise) at least put down the name of a few thinkers you are referring to

popper is definitely still taught in humanities and most of my profs, for some reason, think he still has merit

>>1837119

I only replied to that other poster, I never started the IQ talk. Now fuck off

>>1837121

>Well you can go and fuck a goats ass with a metal screwdriver you god damn alley rapist
>calling others underage

lmao. did you get lost, /b/tard? who the FUCK talks like that

>>1837123


>yeah, but HOW is it wrong?

If you cut off my post before I give you one example of how it's wrong you're not going to understand much.

>not even closely resembling how science has ever worked

Other problems might be not being able to define under which instances hypotheses are actually falsified, which makes falsificationism completely kaput.

>>1836126
How many philosophers do we read about, how many women?

>>1836254
>Third, even if they overwhelmingly vote for the candidates whose policies are more detrimental to the country's benefit, then that should not disqualify them from voting
Sounds exactly like the type of behavior that should disqualify one from voting

>>1837134
women btfo

inb4 some numale mentions a few female philosophers, disregarding the fact that the male-to-female philosopger ratio is somewhere around 99 to 1.

File: 13435519_10153846532664401_8606106715222835576_n.jpg (85KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 960x720px

Lol. Hitler felt women were inferior to men so he didn't let them work in factories.

Which the US and Soviets had tons of women in factories.

Then the Soviets had plenty of women in the military on the front line with snipers and nurses racking up quite a body count of German soldiers.

See how that turned out for Germany.

>>1837139
>the Soviets had plenty of women in the military on the front line with snipers and nurses racking up quite a body count

mirin' this level of historical revisionism.

>>1837095
Disprove the quote then

>>1836153
/pol/ is proof that the male millennial right is also unable to control their emotional urges. Every decision they make is a knee-jerk response to some trend that disgusts them.

>>1837083
>you look like a complete plebeian when you're avatar fagging as subpar youtube philosophers
I'm not, I was memeing the "not an argument" meme.

> the limits of the scientific method,
I understand that science is limited, this is certain if not for the very simple fact that our senses are limited.

Consider for instance this passage from Beyond Good and Evil
>It is perhaps just dawning on five or six minds that physics, too, is only an interpretation and exegesis of the world (to suit us, if I may say so!) and not a world-explanation; but insofar as it is based on belief in the senses, it is regarded as more, and for a long time to come must be regarded as more—namely, as an explanation. Eyes and fingers speak in its favor, visual evidence and palpableness do, too: this strikes an age with fundamentally plebeian tastes as fascinating, persuasive, and convincing—after all, it follows instinctively the canon of truth of eternally popular sensualism. What is clear, what is "explained"? Only what can be seen and felt—every problem has to be pursued to that point

If we're to know anything we may only know that which our senses communicate to us. As limited as they are they're all that we have, and it is nothing short of retarded to totally disregard your senses for their limitations as fundamentally without that sensual insight the abstract is even more limited.

Speaking of the Greeks I advise you revisit this classic.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-natphil/

>>1837147
>"the male millennial right"

what kind of a spooked beta numale do you have to be in order to think that "the male millenial right" is a thing

>>1837094
Trump is a populist who caters specifically toward the core of working class white Americans more than any other group. Is he left wing? Are you so mentally anemic that you can't conceive of politics outside of "he appeals to the masses he must be left of center?"

>>1837138
It's a good hint that men are more likely to think in depth on a more regular basis about stuff that is less sensational.

>>1837147
Why are you obsessed with /pol/?

If they trigger you so much then stop on by to prove yourself correct

There's everything from Nazis to Anarchists

>>1837152
Authoritarian leftists have been in power so long that they don't realize they ARE the establishment

>>1837131

>missspelling kaputt
>explanation is literally a single sentence

sorry, I expected too much I see. guess some vague explanation with no backbone is everything I get. it's okay dude.. I'm getting used to the level of discourse being the same of /b/. guess I just thought you'd have something to say.

>>1837134

simone weil is based

>>1837094
>Brb gonna tell that to all the commies I know, can't have them turn into ebil NAZIS.
I didn't say rebelling a republic means you're not a leftist, I said that being a rebel alone doesn't make you a leftist. Hell, depending on context republicans may indeed be leftists themselves as was the case in the French revolution.

>Totally not MUH socialism
Except totalitarianism and populist rhetoric doesn't make a leftist either, and especially wouldn't have been considered leftist at the time in which the Nazis were actually in power. This line of thinking only has the illusion of credibility since the expansion of the USSR and countries to utilize their methods when you can point at the monumental influence of the Soviets and claim that that's the benchmark of leftism.

It isn't. I advise you actually read some leftist literature and notice how
>Pretend to be super-working class and institute a totalitarian state
Is notably absent. Even as Lenin, probably one of the worst offenders for totalitarian state building said

>With the state there is no freedom. When there is freedom there will be no state.

>>1837142

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_women_in_World_War_II

3% of Soviets Military were women.

>>1837172
You are right. The establishment are the true reactionaries.

>>1836153
>Simply because women are emotional by default.
All political motivations are driven by emotional responses.

>>1837139
>Hitler felt women were inferior to men

Wrong

>>1836126


No one should be voting, but women are especially egregious examples of bad shit happening thank to governance by plebiscite.

>>1836126
ITT
Nu males defend their new age ideals that will surely go unchallenged for the rest of history.
You guys ever even met and known a decent amount of women? It's like you're in denial of human nature.

>>1837152
Don't believe it? Visit /pol/ and be amazed.

>>1837173

>guess I just thought you'd have something to say.

You're stuck at Popper as if we were in 1960 and you're trying to act superior?

LMAO at your life.

As if I'm going to write several paragraph just for you on a fucking chinese imageboard.

>>1837199
I agree with this

File: 1470357242782.png (194KB, 448x468px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 448x468px

>>1837200
>human nature

PLEB ALERT

File: queen elizabeth.jpg (12KB, 199x253px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 199x253px

>>1837192

Bitch please.

>>1837200
I've never had a girlfriend and i'm an entirely inegalitarian traditionalist shitlord. I guess that makes me into a fedora on here, but i just consider myself a regular european male.

>>1836934
>>1836962
>>1836998
t. Guido Guiseppe Scattone

>>1836126
No, of course not.

>>1837211

>blank-slatism
>ever

Dude, just, no.

>>1837211
Nice bait.

It's weird coming from a sexist nation and watching people deny what everyone considers common sense based on plainly observable phenomena

>>1837202
/pol/ is one of the oldest boards

The left is boards are full of teenagers and college students who don't even pay taxes

>>1837218
Human nature is informed and molded by the material conditions of humans.

This much is plainly obvious by the contrast between the nature of those in poverty and those in comfort.

>>1837225
What exactly do you mean? Give an example.

>>1836126


If X is like Y 70% of the time and Z 30% of the time, betting on Y 100% of the time is the rational choice even if it appears to autists that it means 'all X are like that' and pointing an exception anywhere counts as some sort of devastating critique.

If the phrase 'the exception that proves the rule' confuses you you might have autism.

>>1837206

>As if I'm going to write several paragraph just for you on a fucking chinese imageboard.

yeah who cares about actual discussion and discourse, let's all post memes and call each other names xD

>>1837199
/thread

>>1837228
inb4 you deny hereditary effects on human behaviour.

>>1837228

>Human nature is informed and molded by the material conditions of humans

Something can be molded only if it already exist in some state.
In other words, human nature exists.

>>1837228


Occam's razor. It is plainly obvious that more virtuous humans outcompete untermenschen scum for material goodies.

>>1837233
Seriously. That was such a shit tier argument
>As if i'm actually going to TYPE things on 4chan!
>No no, can't make arguments here, hehe,
>I'm above it all!

>>1837227
>The left is boards are full of teenagers and college students who don't even pay taxes
And you know this because?

Not to mention there's only one arguably leftist board and that's /lit/.

>/pol/ is one of the oldest boards
By virtue of /pol/ being one of the most popular boards I would naturally assume that it's one of the most underage boards, as is the case with similarly popular boards like /b/ and /v/. I could very possibly be wrong on this though.

Not to mention the most extreme age of people you're likely to find on 4chan are 30 somethings, which are still millenials.

>>1837233

I've already given you two points from which to start arguing (impossibility of ascertaining when falsification has obtained and falsificationism as a modus operandi not ever happening in the history of science), instead you're spazzing out at someone not behaving properly on fucking 4chan.

Criticize content or shut up.

>>1837238
Seconded

>>1837238
>In other words, human nature exists.
Human nature does exist, it's just very plastic.

>>1837243
Actually no because poorer children adopted into richer families at a young age experience a rise in IQ. This is a scientific fact.

>>1837247

Because leftism correlates with being young. People become more right-wing with age unless they're cat ladies or total failures aside from some academic nonsense not even their colleagues care about.

>>1837258
I like how you added
>This is a scientific fact
As if it enforces your argument somehow. Might as well have finished off with an "Amen".

>>1837258

>Human nature does exist, it's just very plastic

It's very plastic in how innate tendencies are projected, not in terms of molding those tendencies themselves.

>>1837259
Leftism also correlates with IQ.

From this we can gather than /pol/ is the least intelligent board. As is also demonstrated by how easily they fall for bait.

>>1837251

so why do you have to leave it at hints?

what fucking difference does it make? its not like youre going to do anything but shitpost for the next tn minutes so you might aswell write a single paragraph. why wouldn't you? what's wrong with trying to be educational? I still think you know more about popper than I do, I'm just waiting for you to expand on

>impossibility of ascertaining when falsification has obtained and falsificationism as a modus operandi not ever happening in the history of science

if it really were this easy to discredit his entire philosophy then why do people still write books on the subject? who did you read that gave you this idea, did you come up with it yourself, why?

might aswell use your time for something worthwile, you know.

>Criticize content or shut up.

my goal was never to critisize you though, why are you so assblasted?

>>1837229
Anyone who has spent a significant amount of time around women understands this stuff

Women are not much different from children

I notice it tends to be guys without much experience who believe we're equal

>>1837258


And did you know if you worked out more you might be less of a skinnyfat bitchboi? Doesn't mean you've got the same potential as GSP though.

>>1837228
Why do I feel like you own a pittbull?

>>1837272
Well that's how you define a numale, believes in equality and doesn't do very well with the ladies.

>>1837262
Here's a source if you're skeptical
>The importance of the environment for IQ is established by the 12-point to 18-point increase in IQ when children are adopted from working-class to middle-class homes

http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/amp-67-2-130.pdf

>>1837263
I'd argue that material conditions do indeed mold the tendencies of humans. Such as how working class people are much more violent than more wealthy demographics of society. Or even how sexual aggression significantly varies across human populations.

>>1837267
Who ever is in charge of saying who is and who isn't intelligent is also in charge of saying who is and isn't correct. C'mon don't be a dickhead now chum.

>>1837267
Yes /pol/ as a board is pretty shit for discussion, simply because it moves so fast, make a thread on /pol/, hit refresh immediately and it's already on page 3.
This is an awful environment for political discussion but it in no way discredits any of the views /pol/acks have.
What are you trying to say? I'll never understand /his/'s obsession with /pol/, it's like a playground crush

>>1837285


The continuum fallacy claims another unfortunate victim.

PS twin studies or bust faget.

>>1837276
Yes. But you've completely missed the point, I wasn't saying that anyone can potentially achieve anything. I was saying that human nature (that being behavioural and thought patterns) is informed by your material conditions.

>>1837278
No, I have a border collie and a black lab.