Why are the philosophers of the past always man and not woman?

File: heil.jpg (118KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 480x640px

>>1837454
no, men have been oppressed throughout all of history. they are the philosophers coz they are the only ones able to break out of the meme due to their oppression. instead of catering to womens every need and want like wagecuck slaves.

>Is sexism a thing that started thousands of years ago?

Obviously yes. Now delete your thread before you summon more robots

>>1837456
women have it far better than men.

>>1837457
When? Where?

>>1837458
do you not listen to current affairs. pussy is put on a pedestal and men are in the dirt. hitlers right up there. women are just stuck in the meme

File: 6348486328_fb4e2aaef6.jpg (101KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 500x333px

>>1837457
>>1837459
and making it a contest is like the most feminine thing you can do you little pussy


Just remember gender's all a show
You wanna be a little whiny faggot because a bunch of retards prefer another mask than yours then that's ok

>>1837456
>Delete your thread before you summon more robots

Seems like it's too late for that.

>>1837461
wagecuck

>>1837460
I agree. It annoys me when an attractive, twenty years old white girl complains about me oppressing her, though. I think feminism has probably given rise to a lot of misogynists over the last fifteen years.

>>1837454

the women were too busy being penetrated by multiple chads while the philosophers had the classic male clear and balanced mind to make contributions to the world.

>tfw virginity isnt sacred anymore.

>>1837463
That will create an endless loop though, where does it stop?

>>1837460

>gender's all a show.

another leftist genderqueer marxist faggot.

>>1837464
Would you rather have lived as a chad who penetrated women back then, or would you rather have been one of the philosophers of your choice?

Yet my answer to this choice is reversed when I ask it myself now as opposed to thousand years ago.

Because women were not given the opportunity to read books, publish books, voice their opinions around men and so on. If any did, they were laughed at because no women before did it. And if they did and were not laughed at it, they are exceptions.

Sexism started when the concept of family started, and women were seen as property of men, as well as with the rise of armies and the fact that the more men the better. Women were set to do house work and men were more active members of society, of the city and so on. Physical power was translated into military power, ruling power, intellectual power and so on. That's why it was men that went to debates, were given proper scholarly education and thus the only ones who were producing new philosophical work.

It is only very recently that the very capitalist notion that created this turned it on itself to made it desirable for women to work outside their houses in factories, learn to read, and be able to buy things on their own, which in turn gave them some awareness of these disparities and made them more conscious of their social situation, making the feminist movement prostest for the right of voting, divorcing, studying, and so on.

Don't listen to feminists who say there were actually a bunch of incredible women in the past in philosophy and so on. There weren't, it's contraditory. There weren't because they couldn't, because they were oppressed.

>>1837454
>he doesn't know about hetairai
>he doesn't know about hipparchia
>he doesn't know about hubris
>he
lel bitch get back in the kitchen you're not made for this

>>1837469
>naming obscure philosophers only autistic /lit/ readers will understand

Why don't you just agree that OP is right? Oh right, I think it's called being a contrarian.

>>1837467
whats your answers?

>>1837468
love it when people invent history when they weren there or dont use any sources. just cooked up from "common sense"

everyone knows sexism is just a meme.

>>1837465
I'm not sure if it will. If it does stop it might be with a public intellectual spewing MRA talking points about how women are, in many ways, better off than men, and how a lot of mainstream feminism relies on junk statistics, glaring contradictions, and concepts like rape culture which are almost wholly unrelated to reality. It will probably just take our generation, raised by the internet with the purple hair lesbian boogeyman, growing up and being reactionary in art and media. SJWs are on the way out because they're getting made fun of and becoming self conscious, just like scene kids or hipsters.

>>1837470
>cynicism is obscure
>calling philosophers obscure who are not heraclitus
>"philosophers"
>when two of those are social statuses and i only mentioned one philosopher
i'm not responsible for your ignorance bitchboi, back in the kitchen and away from the techne like a good housewife, stop trying to pollute the skilled women

>>1837471
I would have chosen to be a philosopher back then. And to be a chad now.
Something with pre-programmed brain..

>>1837472
Wait a minute, anon, I'll just post the sources, do you want coffee and a cookie as well?

>>1837474
>>cynicism is obscure
the female cynics chose to fucked in the middle of the streets

Even when women try to stop being normies, their life revolves around sex. Most Men not being able to have orbiters without efforts, they have the opportunity to reflect on their life.

>>1837476
do it honky.

>>1837477
exactly, women have it better than men

when will te chad wagefaggots learn

>>1837478
Alright, I'll just sip my flaccid penis in your coffee now that I know you're interested

>>1837477
>the female cynics chose to fucked in the middle of the streets
do you think they were only fucking other women? that diogenes secretly had a house to jack it indoors? kek, you're worse than normie scum, reading harry potter would be a step up for you

>>1837467
>Would you rather have lived as a chad who penetrated women back then, or would you rather have been one of the philosophers of your choice?
chad now
philosopher then

because a chad with condoms today has more opportunities with all the females craving to spread their legs

File: disgusted_dave.png (313KB, 539x435px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 539x435px

>it's another /pol9k/ posting their shit on /lit/ thread

/lit/ really needs to step up with the content creation so we can wash this shit off page one.

>>1837481
I think you must read about the cynics before displaying your stupidity

>>1837480
stop wasting time because you know you have no sources. ill gladly suck your 2 inch shaft rather than bow down to the oppressions of women

>>1837484
>maybe if i call anon stupid all the anecdotes of the cynics through history will magically change and when other anons look them up, they'll agree with me
well, bitchboi, it's really come to this for you, you've begun to believe harry potter is real and gave you magical powers

>>1837483
braindead brainwawshed chad pretending there are no problems in the world

>>1837487
braindead brainwashed robot pretending his sexual frustration is the real problem in the world.

>>1837488
prove me im wrong.

>>1837489
>asking anon how to masturbate
gay

File: 1406132641673.jpg (10KB, 312x312px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 312x312px

>>1837458
>>1837459
>>1837460
>anon BTFO some cunt
>"Ww-when?!?! Where?!?!"
>anon gives perfect answer
>cunt resorts with "GENDERS NOT REAL WHY ARE YOU MAKING THIS A CONTEST"
LMAO cunts really need to go back to being good housewives, they are caught unawares when facts hit their ugly, inferior faces.

File: Nobel.jpg (6KB, 166x250px)

6KB, 166x250px

>>1837490
how did you manage to get that out of what he said? better to be gay (and not homophobic) than bowing down in servitude to female fickleness and inequity

>>1837491
>>1837492
We get it, you hate women.

>>1837493
when did i say i hated women?

DEY BE KEEPIN A WOMIN DOWN!

>>1837493
Hate is a strong word, roastie. I merely pity you

>>1837454
Because the patriarchy is a real thing.
Too bad identity politics are marginalizing by nature, maybe more men would realize this.

In Greece and Rome, women were not expected to be trained in philosophy.

Anscombe is quite good.

>>1837528
WE WUZ QUEENS N SHIT

>>1837553
Women were literally queens tho

>>1837561
HOL UP

SO YOU BE SAYIN

File: Queens.jpg (26KB, 620x350px)

26KB, 620x350px

>>1837574

women is a meme

>>1837454
>muh sexism

Women have been the protected gender throughout history.

>>1837454
>Is sexism a thing that started thousands of years ago?

Depends what you mean by "sexism" in this context.

I mean, men and women have, for most of history, had gender roles, e.g molds that they were expected to fill.

This applied to ancient philosophers who were men as much as it applied to women.

Calling it sexist might be true, but it's missing something crucial.

>no one in this thread has mentioned Hypatia of Alexandria yet
>no one has mentioned Héloïse d'Argenteuil

Lolwut

>>1837547
Anscombe is fucking great.
>inb4 Wittgenstein did it all for her

Yep, and Aquinas was literally just a Christian Aristotle.

>>1837659
who?

>>1837669
>>1837542
>>1837470

Just cuz your a typical American educated pleb who doesn't know anything beyond the false narrative that the past was some kind of totalitarian patriarchy who's only goal was to "oppress women" doesn't mean "philosophers of the past were always men."

Why not actual research beyond "gender studies 101" before making statements dumb like this?

>>1837659
>Héloïse d'Argenteuil
Nobody cares about your meme strong wimin and feminist revisionist history. Women were/are/always will be irrelevant.

>>1837715
Didn't Abelard just beat her?

>>1837741
Don't know and don't care.

[spoiler]She probably deserved it.[/spoiler]

all those leftwing marxist fags need to get real with the truth. stop doing what the media tells you to.

>>1837709
>who's only goal was to "oppress women"
It was quite literally their only goal. Oh, and also fuck them/rape. You're talking about a society that wouldn't even let women sell their works without being laughed at and taken seriously, you do know that plenty to girls like Margaret Keane had to rely on other men to play pretend to merely sell their work? GTFO

File: 1470089603386.jpg (22KB, 212x211px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 212x211px

>>1837760
>media is marxit
holy kek

>>1837761
Oy Vey Mrs. Shekelstein, I had no idea.

Women were vicious beings even while oppressed. Natural manipulators and prone to utterly destroy those they deem as enemies. Some empires rose and fell because of a woman and yet their name isn't even mentioned.

The power of the vagina is very profound.

>>1837454
Because men and women are fundamentally different. They have two totally different purposes and are opposites.
These differences preclude women from reaching the highest intellectual levels.
The smartest people around will always be men.

>>1837825
hi /r9k/

>>1837454
Men tend to be either more clever or more retarded while while women are usually average. So although men and women on average have more or less the same intelligence men are more likely to have the right intelligence to be philosophers.

That being said there were ancient female philosophers and more as this anon >>1837659 just pointed out.

>>1837715
>Being butthurt over the success of someone of the opposite gender
Please explain to me how you're any different from the modern feminist who don't like men being strong?
>INB4 "I'm different because I'm right."
That's the same self righteous argument a feminist would make.

>>1837761
the idea of having a woman's brain or values is fucking terrifying. Knowing you'll never be as smart or as strong as a man. Not being able to derive pleasure from a reading a good book, solving a tough problem at work, or executing a 1337 strategy in vidya, because your hormones and neural architecture render you too vapid to enjoy anything other than Normiebook likes or Chad's cock.

It'd be a fucking existential holocaust. I'd pity women if they weren't such relentless harpies in their ignorance.

>>1837943
1. You're not as smart as you think you are
2. Stop projecting like an autist
3. go back to /r9k/

>>1837943
Women read though.

>>1837934
>le x is no different than y meme

>>1838021
>Implying it being a meme makes it wrong
It's a meme for a reason. If x is no different than y wasn't the case for many things it wouldn't be a meme.

>>1837454

The same reason men are still a majority in maths graduates. Because it's hard.

>>1838066
Wrong, it's because still to this day women are not encouraged to pursue mathematics. Once it becomes female-friendly, you would see much more women enter STEM.

>>1837454
Only if natural tendencies can be considered.

Men and women evolved to be different, what you describe in your bait pasta is one consequence of such.

>>1838080
I know right? We need like, pink numbers and flowers and shit.

>>1838080
>philosophy is STEM

>>1837943
>>1837875
>>1837825

>>1838111
You need to ENCOURAGE women to do shit otherwise they won't do anything, you insensible patriarchical shitlord!

>>1838080
My younger sister is a math professor yet I can't do math for shit.

>>1838019
I ain't talking 50 Shades of Grey

>>1838134
Nor am I.

>>1838122
What a failure

Kill yourself

>responding to a bait thread
10/10 82 responses so far.

>>1838155
Actually women really are this stupid

>>1838080
Back then it was because women had less rights. I noticed the vast majority of women who complain about STEM don't know shit about any STEM subjects and are usually taking liberal arts or gender studies instead. They're perhaps making these as excuses as for them not having the skills to do STEM.

>>1838178
They have the skills to do MY stem....

File: image.jpg (54KB, 1280x720px)

54KB, 1280x720px

>>1837943

>>1837454
>Is sexism a thing that started thousands of years ago?
No, It was only in cases where assholes were being assholes were it was 'a thing'and evil assholes were historically evil assholes to everyone. When assholes were being assholish to women and they were were really "oppressed" men had it equally as bad if not most of the time far worse. There are people who legitimately have a right to claim dipshits made their life suck ass and experienced legitimate oppression. You aren't one of those people. Fuck off with your victim Olympics
>>1837457
>>1837463
>>1837473
>>1837491
>>1837895
>https://radishmag.wordpress.com/2014/02/14/pump-and-dump/
>https://radishmag.wordpress.com/2013/09/27/fair-sex/
>http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/12/04/the-sexodus-part-1-the-men-giving-up-on-women-and-checking-out-of-society/
>http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/12/09/the-sexodus-part-2-dishonest-feminist-panics-leave-male-sexuality-in-crisis/
>>1838178
>women had less rights.
Quit spouting this meme

File: 1463447139235.png (194KB, 500x500px)

194KB, 500x500px

If men and women are equal how come they are different

>>1838251
So what about in Ancient Athens, where women couldn't participate in public political life to any extent, had limited property rights, weren't considered legal persons, and were barred from conducting legal proceedings, never mind the social and cultural barriers imposed on them? What about Victorian England, where women couldn't vote and upon marriage lost innumerable rights including possession of all wages and property, relinquished the right to consent sexually when married, were not allowed to make contracts independently, were legally discriminated against in divorce and custody, and had virtually no opportunity for higher education and university access? None of this is sexism or oppression? None of this is women having less rights? How can people constantly peddle revisionist bullshit like this seriously for the sole purpose of defending their ideology?

Christ this board is shit

>>1837659
Hypathia is OK. d'Argenteuil, not so much. Just a stupid girl who fell in love with an asshole.

If she is a great wise person, so is my cousin.

>>1838387
>WAAA WHY DIDN'T EVERY CULTURE ON EARTH TREAT WOMEN THE WAY POST 60s WESTERN SOCIETY DOES?

> I'M SO HAPPY NOW, AND THINGS ARE SO GREAT I KNOW THIS IS THE BEST AND ONLY WAY IT SHOULD BE

>>1838624
Except all I said was that sexism and a lack of rights for women have historically existed, not that they were better or worse.

Typing in all caps and strawmanninrg your opposition just makes you look like a whiny incoherent retard

>>1838656
> WAAA ALL CAPS OFFENDS MY FEMININE SENSABLITIES

> your accurate representation of my viewpoint is strawmanning

>Sexism isn't subjective

>>1837454


Women are like children and lack the same capacity for agency that men do.

>>1838673
Not that anon, but I really love to imagine how people who writes like that looks.

>>1838683
That men do what ? Lack the same capacity for agency ? Do know you write like you have brain damage ? Are you a man ? Is that abstract undefined unscientific "agency" helping you there ?

>>1838700
*how people who writes like that look

File: omgcat.jpg (227KB, 1600x1120px)

227KB, 1600x1120px

>>1837454
While women are better at learning in general men tend to be more adaptive and have a will to go their own way leading to more original thinkers and inventors. An interesting physiological difference in male brains is the number of interconnections is much higher than that of a female brain.

Here is a full list of differences :

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hope-relationships/201402/brain-differences-between-genders

>>1838756
stupid article
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2016/04/26/gender-myth-busted-study-shows-no-such-thing-as-male-female-brains/

>>1838813
^note that this article isn't perfect, but it makes some basic arguments that are necessary here

File: 12103m.jpg (23KB, 500x260px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 500x260px

>>1837454

>>1838700
Its okay, I know girls are superficial beings who care more about looks than substance.

Thanks for proving my point. No wonder more girls philosophers with that attitude.

File: What's Wrong With Feminism.png (125KB, 1344x1263px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1344x1263px

>>1838387
> What about Victorian England, where women couldn't vote
If your gonna pull the whole vote bullshit, they're were women who got the vote before many men
>where women couldn't vote and upon marriage lost innumerable rights including possession of all wages and property, relinquished the right to consent sexually when married, were not allowed to make contracts independently, were legally discriminated against in divorce and custody,
>More Victim Olympics
>None of this is sexism or oppression? None of this is women having less rights?
What this is you playing more victim Olympics and failing to recognize people who made life shit for women, made life equally shit or more so for everyone else, especially men. Also minorities who suffered legitimate oppression, not the SJW tier bullshit "oppression".
>How can people constantly peddle revisionist bullshit like this seriously for the sole purpose of defending their ideology?
The only person peddling revisionist history is you. Quit your blatant projecting and again fuck off with your victim Olympics.
>Christ this board is shit
And your part of the cancer making it that way. Leave.

>>1838700


You sound like you're having an aneurism anon. Is this a common reaction when experiencing crimethink?

File: turjk.jpg (7KB, 305x165px)

7KB, 305x165px

>>1838824

i shall read both and then judge you all.

>>1837454
>Is sexism a thing that started thousands of years ago?
Well yeah. Of course.

File: there's a life outside.jpg (99KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 500x500px

>>1838683
>>1838700
>>1839101
All of you are showing that you're retarded through the medium of your extreme butthurt.

>>1838700
And although I agree with you the way you're delivering your statements indicates you have problems. You can even still deliver the same insults without sounding butthurt.

>>1837709
the patriarchy isn't real.
>memes
Yeah, it's real. It's an evolutionary anachronism in most cultures. Here in the west for sure. Are you trying to say gender roles aren't real? Are you trying to say that women having voting rights or doing anything besides being a homemaker isn't evolutionary novel, and a result of increased living standards and a drastically different habitat?
Don't be a fucking dumbo.
The patriarchy isn't systemic in nature as some people assume, it's a result of parts in the system affecting the function of the the whole, men with cultural dogma treating women like they used to be.

>>1839243


I think you're projecting anon. Please find help.

>>1839324
>projecting
There's already proof that you're butthurt. There's still no proof that I am butthurt.

>>1839288
>the patriarchy isn't real.
>Yeah, it's real
It isn't dumbass
>Are you trying to say gender roles aren't real?
They're real and their are many women that choose them.
>Are you trying to say that women having voting rights
>Alot of them got the 'vote' before many men did
>or doing anything besides being a homemaker isn't evolutionary novel
>Women in the past never had jobs
Being a homemaker is again something many women chose, it wasn't forced upon them and they could get and did have jobs
>It's an evolutionary anachronism in most cultures.
>he patriarchy isn't systemic in nature as some people assume, it's a result of parts in the system affecting the function of the the whole, men with cultural dogma treating women like they used to be.
>more fucking victim Olympics
>it's all mens fault
And if you're even going go into what affects what you are literally looking at this with the most narrowing minded idiotic view, that disregards the subject of this board or any type of historical context whatsoever.
>Don't be a fucking dumbo.
You have no right to call anyone dumb

>>1839472
>women chose gender roles.
Not in this deterministic nature, that should be especially apperant in this cultural context
>being a homemaker isn't something that was forced upon them
Yeah throwing their babies away was always an option. Anyways faggot, it's gender roles.
>ridiculing understanding causal relationships
This is bait, fuck off dumbo.

>>1837468

That's just not true.

The Medieval period had a ton of powerful and influential learned women who men respected. Just look at St.Hildegard of Bingen, she was a polymath, composed music, and advised the Pope. Christine de Pizanne was the most popular author of the 14th century. Women who showed that they should be taken seriously intellectually were, at least after Christendom took hold of Europe. It is just that because most women don't have those tendencies it was up to those women who did to "prove themselves" to a greater degree than men were usually expected to. Women who tried, and had results as was expected were laughed it. But so were men who were of the same quality of intellect, even more so since they were expected to be better, Likewise, under feudal systems of power,it was'nt uncommon for nepotism to lead to women taking state positions. Many women in the church had positions of power as owners of convent's. And a woman even had a monopoly on the beer industry at a point.

Come the early modern period when we look at the correspondences of philosophers like Descartes and Leibniz, we see many royal and aristocratic women conversing with them philosophically. Hell, Leibniz even got the idea of Monad's from Anne Conway, who was publishing Philosophical works herself. The fact of the matter is that philosophy has always been open to the upper class regardless of gender, save in the classical world. Being a noble woman in the past meant that while you could not join institutions you could do anything you want, learn philosophy, play music, etc. So as long as you don't shame your family and produce some decent heirs.

It was western patriarchy' openness to their upper class women becoming learned if they wished that eventually feminism came about from those upperclasses.

1/2

>>1839472
>victim Olympics
Gender roles
>it's all men's fault
I failed to mention cultural dogma in women. I was going to mention it ad hoc but decied it wasn't worth my time.

>>1839518

Of course feminism's alliance with multiculturalism and egalitarianism has left them in a position where they must now reject the western patriarchy that spawned them in the first place. This has them now allying with third world invaders who would be glad to actually commit sexist violence against them and remove them from the public sphere entirely. The feminist experiment collapses on itself because when actually given this much power and influence women end up choosing self destruction through ethnomasochism, open boarders, mass infanticide, and a culture of victim-posturing and shallow novelty.

It is a shame really.

2/2

>>1839511
>Not in this deterministic nature, that should be especially apperant in this cultural context
They choose to do it or not do it all the time.
>Yeah throwing their babies away was always an option.
That was absolutely not their only option and plenty of safe options were available
>Anyways faggot, it's gender roles.
Except it's not you fucking retard
>>1839529
>Gender roles
Victim Olypics also known as oppression Olympics.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQYiSTPhz4M
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dVc1mDxMik
>I failed to mention cultural dogma in women.
You've failed to mention anything actually legitimate or true
> I was going to mention it ad hoc but decied it wasn't worth my time.
>I decided doing any research or critically thinking in any capacity was not worth my time.

>>1839358


Look at all these words you're typing.

>>1839830
No decent response to >>1839518

Or you just don't want to admit unless gender roles conform to your particular narrow minded post-60s western norms than its somehow "oppression" and "sexism"

>>1839072
>If your gonna pull the whole vote bullshit, they're were women who got the vote before many men

1. The restriction against women voting was because of and specific to their gender, whereas the other restrictions you're talking about had nothing to do with and were irrelevant to gender, and therefore cannot be counted as oppression of men in the same way restrictions against women as a whole can be counted as oppression of women

2. All non gender specific restrictions that applied to men (such as property requirements) applied to women as well, so there was no point at which all women could vote while only certain men were specifically or uniquely excluded

>victim olympics

What the fuck are you even babbling about? I get that you've recently discovered this word from your favorite meme-tier anti-SJW youtubers where you get all your talking points and think it's some really clever argument, but you're just mindlessly repeating buzzwords at this point. It doesn't even apply to anything I'm saying especially since I'm essentially just listing historical facts in response to blatant revisionism

Otherwise you didn't even bother to respond to my corrections so I guess there's nothing else to say

Women don't have the mental capacity to philosophize like men.

Yeah! What have the women ever done for us?

>>1837454

>Why are the philosophers of the past always man and not woman?

Simple. They simply did not want to. One only needs to look at women participating in poetry and literature to see that philosophy was also well within their reach.

I find your expectation of women having to actively pursue a specific social role they did not desire to be quite sexist.

>>1840181
the richest women, typically the most expensive whores, did participate to intellectual pursuits, but they did it to pass time. Women are not nihilistic enough to take seriously their little intellectual endeavor.

>>1840078
>and therefore cannot be counted as oppression of men in the same way restrictions against women as a whole can be counted as oppression of women
>All non gender specific restrictions that applied to men (such as property requirements) applied to women as well, so there was no point at which all women could vote while only certain men were specifically or uniquely excluded

>http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-lies-feminism/women-were-not-oppressed-by-not-having-the-vote/

Except when whole minorities including the men in them and people such as slaves were excluded form the vote. And as I just posted can you not fucking read that there were women that could vote before men.

>What the fuck are you even babbling about?

>http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Victim%20Olympics
Your stupid fucking fucking oppression bullshit and the fact that you can't fucking fathom that men had it shit equal to or worse than women.

>I get that you've recently discovered this word from your favorite meme-tier anti-SJW youtubers where you get all your talking points and think it's some really clever argument, but you're just mindlessly repeating buzzwords at this point
>I have no idea what the fuck I'm talking about so I'll just call things that clearly debunk my retarded SJWism meme teir, and say an anon is mindlessly repeating buzzwords.

>It doesn't even apply to anything I'm saying especially since I'm essentially just listing historical facts in response to blatant revisionism
Everything I've posted applies to everything you're saying especially when your failing to understand not only what actual oppression is and that women weren't "oppressed"; there were people actually and legitimately oppressed that had it far worse than women and when women had it bad, men had it equally as shit or worse.
>(cont.)

>>1841073
>>1840078
>(cont.)
>Otherwise you didn't even bother to respond to my corrections
>corrections
>implying it's not just more bullshit you've pulled out of your ass
I've responded to every bullshit statement you've made.
>so I guess there's nothing else to say
there's nothing else to say because you're a retarded dipshit that doesn't know what the fuck it is they're talking about. I'll say it one one more time since you get so assblasted by the truth. Fuck off of this board with your motherfucking victim olympics.

>>1837454
The obvious answer is that women are generally less intelligent than men and less driven to mastery of things since it is in their very nature to have men do everything for them.

File: 1466014649706.png (367KB, 949x1987px)

367KB, 949x1987px

reminder that women want sex and leisure and they get it from men

>>1837454
>Simone de Beauvoir
>only men
Read sum

>>1837458
Everywhere, at all times.