Hi, /sci/. Been emailing a professor in the U.K. about fatherhood

>>8540315
Single mothers are shit. Depending on what he means by muscles, he's also wrong. Drop this guy quick as he seems like a beta back bitch.

>>8540315
Yea he is, if he merely looked at fossils and bones of people from those times men had much larger upper body bones compared to women. It was highly evident that men contained and grew more muscle and their testosterone enabled that growth

Where does he even get that there is no physiological or biological evidence? There's tons of it just in bones alone that support the claim. There's even more seen today where many apes have large males and smaller females

He'll even genetically we can differentiate these growth protein spawning groups down to the Y chromosome and where It specifically starts

What a crock of shit

>>8540322
Physical muscles.
>>8540329
Other than muscles. For example, life expectancy,

>>8540337
Another example being metabolism. Male mammals like humans and apes have higher metabomisms

>>8540315
>Superior
Needs definition.

>We die younger
Probably something to do with the fact that, today, less money is spent on male health care as well as awareness of male issues (the suicide rate for example). I'm not sure what the historical rate is, but I'd imagine men doing the more physical and dangerous jobs likely has an influence. It seems like a massive stretch.

Also who is this professor? I googled him and all I can find is a former NHS childhood psychiatrist.

>>8540353
He's pretty obscure in the scientific community. I've just been reading a lot of his work which ironically has stuff that deals with men being fragile and weak.

are anthropology professors seriously reaching the point where they're denying basic sexual dimorphism common in nearly all mammals at this point?

>>8540315
I don't like the reactionist attitude that "Men are better than women is false so it must be that women are better than men". It's the exact attitude they're trying to rebuke but in the other direction.

Women and men are different (newsflash) and they're better at different things, which is how it's been since prehistory. Comparing them in general in terms of ill-defined "weakness" and trying to say which one is better is stupid.

>>8540366
That's essentially what I emailed him back. Saying that one sex is inherently superior to another doesn't get us anywhere.

>>8540315
Males are biologically superior to women, but women are more important than men because of their social roles.

His argument about men dying earlier is bullshit though.

>>8540359
Big red flags for me

>>8540315
>In many ways-except for our muscles-we are the weaker sex

What the fuck does this mean? Of course there won't be a difference in strength between the sexes if you choose to exclude actual, non-metaphorical strength from the discussion. It's like saying "Except for my height, I'm taller than Shaq."

>>8540395
He's saying that there are biological differences in women that advantage them more.

>>8540395

Why don't you try reading to the end of the line you membrane?

>on all levels except physical, we are the weaker sex

life expectancy based on sex is impossible to determine. is this guy fucking retarded?

academia is such a joke holy shit.

>>8540404
such as?

women have a much higher rate of mental disorder despite less stressful lives.

File: 1462409440247.png (12KB, 194x259px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 194x259px

>>8540404
Maybe he's right, since a lower intelligence would be better for someone in a globalist society.

>>8540315
>we

Absolutely disgusting

>>8540315
>redacting your first name
>not redacting the other person's full name

Poor show If We're Being Completely Honest