Does anyone else think women are pretty much just as smart as men, but don't want them voting or running a country...

Does anyone else think women are pretty much just as smart as men, but don't want them voting or running a country? I think it's mostly just instincts. Women don't have the instincts to build or preserve a nation.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligence
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

No.

>women
>smart

Pick one

Yes dude, women are smart. As you said though, natural instincts take us on different paths.

Anyone who tells you otherwise is a /r9k/ faggot who will die alone and hates women as a coping mechanism for his own failings in life

Men who think women are as smart as men are either virgins or dumb.

Women are book smart, but they will never be wise. It's like asking if a child is smart.

Sure kids are smart, but they are also dumb as fuck.

I bet you don't have a girlfriend or wife.

...

one of my best friends sure doesn't think so and its killing me inside.

>Women are book smart, but they will never be wise.

I think that's essentially what OP meant by "instincts."

would you call your own mother dumb as fuck?

yes, dumb but not dumb as fuck

Youre right, Ive been single for a few months now

Before that I was living with my gf for two years. Things didnt work out and Im able to see where I went wrong, I dont blame everything on her. The difference between me and you is I dont hate 50% of the worlds population and Ill have another whenever Im ready. Try it sometime and maybe you wont be such a bitter and insufferable beta permavirgin.

Feel free to hate on them as much as you want, Im not trying to stop you. Dont be surprised when you never get your dick wet though, come to find out women like being treated as human beings too

Op is a moron. being unable to differentiate your feelings from reality would make us completely mentally inferior to men because employing that skill involves critical thinking.

Women can craft up all types of smart shit after something has happened and from a distance.
Men are required to think in the present, a biological trait to defend others from immediate harm.

Jordan Peterson put it best. No matter how you weigh it, women have different temperaments than men which make them more open and less conscientious than men. This is why they betrayed us.

It has nothing to do with being smart or not, because it has everything to do with temperament.

Women need to lose the vote.

Women are basically /r9k/ losers with the biological capital to compensate for their unwillingness to apply themselves.


A woman raised in a regular environment will always under-perform a man of equal intelligence because she's just not programmed to strive for excellence.

yes, absolutely
that fucking braindead cunt

>"I'm smart but my instincts make me stupid"
paradox.

Eh? I'm happily married. My wife works with women and is under no illusions as to their capabilities.

Definitely not a woman hater. But I'm aware they have characteristics that make them better for certain tasks than others. For example, I find women learn languages far quicker, and often communicate with more ease. However, I don't believe that women make particularly good leaders.

yes

>conscientious
being vigilant and self critical again requires brain power. it does have everything to do with being smart or not. If we are a type of thing that cant discern reality from our resting state, at least more so than men, then you can't hudini our lack of intelligence away.

your post holds an implication that getting your dick touched or having a girlfriend are inherent necessities of life and things to strive for.

Women tend to be incredibly average, and the average is shit tier for humans

women do whatever is socially acceptable.

women aren't book smart, they're shit at nerdy things and don't have very high IQ.

Complementarianism is how things should be. Men and women are equal in value yet they are functionally different. In short women have a different role to play in society and they should embrace it rather than fight against it like they're doing today.

Wikipedia calls it a theological view however I believe it's also biological.

It has nothing to do with intelligence, because how that intelligence is used, even when one is on full command of all the facts, temperament directs its deployment. For instance, what if a woman knows what immigration and feminism is doing to this country, but that is what she wants?

Intelligence has nothing to do with it.

Temperament is EVERYTHING.

Well she is dumb. But she is wiser than me, because she lived more.

oh yes

You think you are smart because you used a big word, but you are not smart.

>just as smart

The only thing they excel over men at is manipulation and being fake.

>Does anyone else think women are pretty much just as smart as men

Lol no.

Some women can be as smart as men, but they are the minority. Men and women think differently. We evolved differently to have different roles in society.

On the flip-side, men are not as good as women at things like being nurturing and empathizing with others emotionally.

>average is shit tier
Average is average, snowflake.

he uses the word temperament because he's scared to use the word intelligence

>us

>uh whu? two things literally not synonymous? same thing I'm so confused! xD

Nice argument buddy.

In that case it really doesn't matter what she wants because as a woman, even if it went to shit, she would still be okay by fact that she had a vagina and whomever takes over, or whatever is left over will look after her. Women just don't have responsibility like men do, it's why they're so "wild". There are little to no consequences for any of their thoughts and decisions, they always have something to fall back on.

the whole voting system needs a revamp 2bh.
the problem is the vote of a retard is worth as much as a self made business owner.

>For instance, what if a woman knows what immigration and feminism is doing to this country, but that is what she wants?
If we are to take your false assumption and begging the question at face value, and assume that your political views are superior, then the only conclusion is that women are all evil.

Considering women care for most ethical causes I think you are asking us to take the bigger leap of logic to defend your rational that we are still smart but shouldnt be in politics. Regardless of your view it is very unlikely that many of us believe that immigration and feminism is destroying our nation. I certainly dont think either is. (to an extent. polarization is the real poison)

>wants to save the white race
>thinks sex isnt important

>he fell for the women are stupid meme

They scheme and conspire with each other all the time, then act stupid in front of men.

Produce evidence that women are as smart as men.
There is none.
In the same way that women are not as strong as men.
Or as creative.
Or as funny.
Or as capable.

About the only thing they are actually better at is long distance swimming.

That's implying he does.

Sup Forums isn't one person. It's perfectly reasonable to see the realities of the declining west and decide you don't care.

>she must have 10+ children
>be fit and work out every day
holy fucking balls this guy went full retarded

>...then the only conclusion is that women are all evil.

Evolutionary behavioral adaptations are not evil, you fucking moron.

Women and men think differently, in complementary ways. This is a good thing. Two perspectives. Neither should trash the other as has become common with the current climate of feminism and MRAs. We need each other.

That said... women have a terrible track record in voting (and leading countries too). On the one hand I think it should he everyone's right to vote. On the other hand it's obvious that things would be better for both women and men if women never had the right to vote.

I guess in the end I have to go with personal freedom for all, even though women can't be trusted with it. Still have to give it to them. I feel the same way with stupid people. They still have an opinion and share this country even if they're dumb as shit.

carrying a baby doesnt make you a useless immobile pile of shit that can only bitch and eat

NO FREE PASS

there actually is tons of evidence, scientific evidence. that's not to say there aren't skeptical positions either, but to say there is not evidence is psuedoscientific claptrapl.

yeah something like that
women are so unstable within their own psychology that you can't expect them to understand more than their own personal issues

the point is irrelevant to begin with.

They can learn things factualy but are heavily skewed by the census of the larger group they belong to aka society. However their lack of internal instinct to preserve their tribe makes them the worst leaders imaginable. They have no empathy for beta males or other women(expecialy if they are prettier than them).

No. They try to appear smart, but really men are the smartest and most talented of the genders. Guys only act as pushovers for that because they're trying not to be rude or they're trying to get that pussy but really they think women are dumb as nails

Sure, based on the number of neurons and sunapses per neuron, I would say women are about 80-90% as smart as men.

>just as smart as men

Nonsense. Intelligence is not a single trait, it's composed of very different skills.

For example, women have a greater linguistic intelligence.

Men have a greater spatial and logical(but this one is controversial probably because of muh feels) intelligence.

They also tend to be way too emotional and childish.

kek sun naps

>it's a jewish meme
>Aristotle was jewish

Damn, I had no idea.

Which is silly, since a guy who acts like a pushover to a woman is never going to get pussy unless he's, most likely unknowingly, about to enter a sub/dom relationship of some kind.

And even then he might not actually ever get pussy per se

Today I challenged my Int O to name a few 'effective' female leaders. He came up with Thatcher. Then drew a blank.
Long story short women make shit leaders. Kathleen Wynne, Angela Merkel...many other examples.
FFS my wife can't pick a restaurant. AGAIN this isn't woman hating. I love women. But they need to know their limitations, just like men do.

>About the only thing they are actually better at is long distance swimming.

Wat.

It doesn't make any sense. Women get tired before men.

>It is very unlikely that many of us (women) believe that immigration and feminism is destroying our nation
>I certainly don't think either is

Typical of a woman to fail to apply critical thinking and group preference in place of emotion when it comes to mass immigration of undesirables.

>That said... women have a terrible track record in voting (and leading countries too). On the one hand I think it should he everyone's right to vote. On the other hand it's obvious that things would be better for both women and men if women never had the right to vote.
this is absolutely bullshit. not being able to vote would ensure that we remain second class citizens, our lives would not just lose the agency of political expression. the ramifications of the re-peal would be massive, from allowing women to take loans (why give a loan to someone less responsible) and therefore lowering her options considerably in investment, purchases, etc. it would also force women out of any high level position in any financial related endevour because the success of those platforms and companies relies on the ability to compete with eachother by influencing government policy. It would instantly destroy everything above the most minimal middle class woman's career.

think about what you are saying for two minutes and you will understand why this statment
>women can't be trusted
will have huge rammifications for us if its written into the very fabric of our political system.

My mom is dumb.
Of course I'd never say that to her because she is my mom, and she's a nice and caring women who raised me to the best of her ability. But yes she's dumb and should not be trusted with handling a great many things. Between her and my father, there is no comparison.

It's like this with the vast majority of couples. Think about how many women just love going shopping and wasting the money their husbands worked for on retarded shit like clothes and purses and shoes to add to their already enormous collections. That's what happens with an uncontrolled woman. Tie her down with kids so she has responsibility and won't go waste your money on dumb shit

this is a delusion, being able to understand other peoples issues involves critical thinking and thus being unable to do so would make us inferior.

That whole thing was a mockery of a woman's demands in a man. Unless they're hideous most women have huge checklists that no man could ever live up to, or if such a man existed they would only go for 10/10s.

However men actually should be a little more picky publicly, women are quite oblivious to some of their unattractive traits.

>women are smart

Weird, my mom is the smartest woman I know. Not as wise as my dad, but her ability to retain knowledge and make connections is quite impressive.

NO! ALL females are nasty, retarded, deformed, inferior to men, disgusting, worthless, revolting pathetic, deformed, hump-chested, penis-envying, lying, cheating,subhuman pieces of shit, especially the ugly, fat,feminist dyke piles of shit, no wonder why MGTOW is growing so fast and feminism is dying, I look foward to the day that Male supremacy becomes the dominate philosiphy on this planet and every female is rounded up and sent to concentration camps and are slowly tortured to death.....I look foward to slowly torturing and raping (just to inflict more pain on those nasty piles of shit more worthless than shit) the revolting, axe wound for genitals creatures known as females to death from newborn baby subhuman cunts to decripit, ugly, old bag elderly cunts of all ages and races (even white ones), every female is a disgusting, revolting, worthless, good for nothing, subhuman leech parasite that need to be slowly tortured and raped to death, especially all ugly pig feminists, SJWS and dykes, besides we already have artificial wombs and sex toys to replace these revolting creatures, why not just kill them already?

I don't profess to know why. But the trend is there. They're better long distance swimmers. Maybe it's something to do with hip movement fat content and muscle fatigue. Idk.

it's true buddy

That's why I said they should never have had the vote to begin with. Never said anything about repealing it. It's done, been done for a long long time and there's no going back. I'm talking in retrospect, things probably would have worked out better if women had never been allowed to vote.

Women are allowed to vote because they are easy to manipulate with muh fee feez, and they in turn can manipulate weak willed men into agreeing with them. You get a lot more than you bargained for when you target women.

And yet you posted none of it.

>everything I don't like is pseudoscience

/thread

Women can be as smart, but they're not as good at controlling their emotions. They let emotions take over even when they go to vote. You might as well be a retard at that point, doesn't matter how good you are at math if you don't use the brain.

No I don't want a woman running a country unless she has an established family

>this is absolutely bullshit. not being able to vote would ensure that we remain second class citizens, our lives would not just lose the agency of political expression.

So, women would go back to being in the societal position that they were for almost all of human existence, across every society on the planet?

>the ramifications of the re-peal would be massive, from allowing women to take loans (why give a loan to someone less responsible) and therefore lowering her options considerably in investment, purchases, etc.

Good. This would actually reincentivize adult women to seek out responsible men who will provide for them and the family that they'll be starting together.

>it would also force women out of any high level position in any financial related endevour because the success of those platforms and companies relies on the ability to compete with eachother by influencing government policy. It would instantly destroy everything above the most minimal middle class woman's career.

Women do not and never have needed "careers". They are far better at nurturing children and maintaining homes. This is their natural role.

>think about what you are saying for two minutes and you will understand why this statment
>women can't be trusted
will have huge rammifications for us if its written into the very fabric of our political system.

It's a necessary thing. We never should have experimented with subverting perfectly functional aspects of our societies in the first place.

>group preference in place of emotion
are these not the same thing or is group preference some scientific term I'm not aware of. if you are refering to in groups, yes I am aware I don't think theyre worth shit because we're biologically programmed to favor them and treat outsiders with extreme disdain. I also don't believe their location matters.

that said I believe the birth rates prsented by immigration are a seperate issue that is part of a more global need for the government regulation of childbirth

if you talk to women on a daily basis you will notice that they are fucking idiots. unless you're a fucking idiot yourself in which case you will not notice it.

Eh, using big words in order to sound smart may be one thing, but he () actually made a perfectly fair, well-reasoned, point.

>It's a necessary thing. We never should have experimented with subverting perfectly functional aspects of our societies in the first place.
not sure why you took the time to argue with my post. the post you replied to is meant to convince the person it is a reply to that all will not be cherry for women in that situation. you apperantly agree. considering it necissary even if it deprives us of massive ammounts of freedom and personal agency.

the line i did quote though is retarded, because for it to be true you would have to have us regress to real tribal societies.

Prove me wrong friend.

this is the same as saying we lack the capacity to differentiate between our emotion and facts, that is a form (a very basic form) of intelligence.

AHH I IS SMARTAR DEN UUUU Y U USE BIGWORD

I wouldn't say it's a big word, more of a long one. Also there are no other words to describe my viewpoint, kinda forced to use it.

There are women like that, yeah. They're not the norm. I'm not a woman hater in any way, shape or form. Don't mistake me for some betacuck faggot who cries about women. If a woman is smarter than me I acknowledge it freely. I've lookes up to women before. It's not common though. For every woman who is better than me at something, there are a thousand men. You'd have to be blind not to see that.

Exceptions would be things like the fashion and cosmetics industry I guess, but gay men dominate that too.

I don't think they're as smart as men, and allowing them to vote is the biggest mistake mankind has ever done.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligence
the first result pretty much goes over everything important you mong.
inb4
>wikipedia
>opinion discarded
you asked for studies, this links to them and summerises their position in the current scientific consensus. I'm not buying a fuck ton of studies for you.

>not sure why you took the time to argue with my post. the post you replied to is meant to convince the person it is a reply to that all will not be cherry for women in that situation. you apperantly agree. considering it necissary even if it deprives us of massive ammounts of freedom and personal agency.

Because I wanted to deconstruct the post to show why certain things you consider "bullshit" are in fact necessary for a functional society; such as the removal of womens' abilities to express themselves politically. You've had your chance, and you've consistently and almost exclusively for destructive, feelings-based policies touted by the Left with regard to government overreach and open immigration.

>the line i did quote though is retarded, because for it to be true you would have to have us regress to real tribal societies.


We'd only really need to "regress" to a pre-suffrage society. Which would be a vast improvement all-around, really.

women have brain
but culturally hate real work liek engineering or computers
they all wana be a showoff manager
never do real work
there is a wall st quant guy who finds how how politically correct and feminist a company is going and shorts them and its now milti millionaire from that insight

>We'd only really need to "regress" to a pre-suffrage society. Which would be a vast improvement all-around, really.
still not the same as "We should have never changed the way our societies function." they started as tribes, so under this logic, they need to stay as tribes.

I feel like I'm on your wavelength. Not a woman hater at all. Very aware of their limitations. My wife is the same, lucky to have found her. Maybe her working with only women contributed to that.
Imagine a manager with only 8 staff unable to make a goddam proper schedule.

>Because I wanted to deconstruct the post to show why certain things you consider "bullshit" are in fact necessary for a functional society;
then you're illiterate. what I was calling bullshit was the idea that removing us from the political sphere of influence doesnt have far reaching consiquences that will ruin our quality of life and agency. you can say its good for society, you can even prove you're right, but none of that changes the fact that we will be the ones to pay the price of being second class citizens. pretending this is not the factual outcome of any appeal of the 19th amendment is preposterous.

Women aren't as smart as men on average, nor should they be voting/running a country.

While women absolutely do have the right to be treated fairly, that doesn't mean we should pretend that males and females are the same.

Yep, it's entirely true.
Things like the hippie movement are feminine in nature, women vote with their feelings. You can show a picture of a dead refugee child and women want to save all the refugees. Doesn't matter that 99% are men with nothing to lose, can't speak the language, don't know the culture, don't know how to treat women and will rape the shit out of them. They saw the sad picture, that's all that's needed to get the support. And they will withhold sex from betacucks to force them to fall in line.
Almost everyone helping illegal immigrants and rapefugees is a woman, because it makes them feel good. Surprise surprise, they get raped or kidnapped.

There's nothing wrong with doing a good thing. Naivety is cute and endearing. But when you let it run uncontrolled, there is a problem. Your child doesn't understand the dangers of the world. That's charming. But you don't let him wander. You don't let him walk onto the freeway. Letting women vote is letting them walk onto the freeway on a national scale.

The issue with women is exactly what's so great about them, they can be too emotional. It makes them sweet and caring at times but also makes it more difficult for them to make tough choices since they are capable of so much empathy, the maternal instinct just makes them want to take care of everyone. Most girls I know who aren't rabid manhating SJW dykes agree with me politically to some extent as long as I don't go full 1488 but despite that they're still liberal because they can't stand to turn their backs on people they perceive as suffering even if the reasoning for it is solid, for them the ends can never justify the means.

If you agree with any action that either directly or indirectly influences the probability of survival for your people, you're defective.

Believing unfettered immigration in the west doesn't damage nations is akin to saying that whites are not threatened by the possibility of being replace in their own countries.

>Government regulation of childbirth
As much as I want that to happen, no one can impose a limit of children on a certain group of people, especially in western host countries.

The uproar from the left in response to a limit on how many children immigrants can have would be enormous.

The only way to prevent the host (white) populations from being replaced by the waves of migrants and their offspring would be to severely limit immigration, evict current migrants, and encourage the host population to reproduce.

But that's not going to happen as long as women feel they need to have a career until they're 35 before they settle down.

Girl with 145 IQ here. It's not necessarily that girls are dumb but most don't take politics seriously and just agree with what's popular (Most Dutch men do this too). This is why mentally stable older women usually vote right. Just make it more difficult to vote and most wouldn't bother to vote.

>Does anyone else think women are pretty much just as smart as men,
They are less smart.
>but don't want them voting or running a country?
Every citizen should have the right to vote even if his/her iq is 50.

>Believing unfettered immigration in the west doesn't damage nations is akin to saying that whites are not threatened by the possibility of being replace in their own countries.
again, you are being illiterate, try reading my position instead of assuming it.

>As much as I want that to happen, no one can impose a limit of children on a certain group of people, especially in western host countries.
oh so you did read it, you're just chosing to ignore it. and yes I am aware of how difficult this is when you people are cosntantly advocating pro life and supporting catholic control of sexual education (Ie not providing any).

and no, I dont think just immigrants should be limited. I think the entire world should be. we need to get down to under 1b globally, and every first world nation, china, and india, bear that responsibility the most out of any other because of the rate at which we consume limited resources.

>then you're illiterate. what I was calling bullshit was the idea that removing us from the political sphere of influence has far reaching consiquences that will ruin our quality of life and agency. you can say its good for society, you can even prove you're right, but none of that changes the fact that we will be the ones to pay the price of being second class citizens. pretending this is not the factual outcome of any appeal of the 19th amendment is preposterous.

You keep speaking as though this would be a negative for women, and I'm not sure why that is. I would think that the recent uptick of unhappy cat-rearing feminists who have finally come to the grim conclusion that their independence and upward mobility has given them nothing more than a life deprived of their biological purpose of raising children and having a loving husband would be evidence enough that women really shouldn't be trying to seek agency. They are predisposed to being submissive to their men. This is biological.

>still not the same as "We should have never changed the way our societies function." they started as tribes, so under this logic, they need to stay as tribes.

What I said is that we should not subvert perfectly functional aspects of our societies. No, we actually built and improved upon tribalism up until recently, where we decided to subvert it; to disastrous results. What we have done is attempted the breakdown of tribal barriers via multiculturalism. Just like the subversion of gender roles, this has ended poorly.

kill all women desu