Maternity leave good for children, misogynists

The mothers are far from being selfish* and lazy.

(*Expecting the man to make the money, his gender role?)

http://bernard.pitzer.edu/~dmoore/psych199s03articles/Brooks-Gunn_Daycare.pdf
Show me the equivalent study on fathers, please. [TLDR Tender Years is true.**]

Past nine months, needs more research to say it’s bad (the positive claim, burden of proof).

**You’d expect this loss of the father is survivable since men died all the time of war, hunting and disease yet we’re demonstrably still here. 

Note for idiots: Survivable is not desirable. Hume is disappointed in you.

Ideally, women should take maternity leave, if the couple can afford to. Whether she does or not is her husband’s business (read: not yours).

The State owns your children

https://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/mum-jailed-for-abducting-children-189525/

If you don’t quietly let the State hand them over to pedophiles and abusers in the “care system”, for big slavery bucks, you go to a big building full of them. But that’s old news, now they’re coming after all the other parents.

She made the children over the course of nine months, they belong to her. It was an investment of her literal body and some women die doing it. She did her job, including feed them – again, with her body. She gave them life and kept them alive.

If the former husband is unfit for the job, the successor takes over. That’s what divorce means. He’s still trying to have husband’s rights (over where she lives, the caregiver) without the responsibility. That won’t last.

Narcissistic divorcees refuse to let their former relatives be happy.

(That would include where the female happens to be one).

This isn’t a victory for “men”, or deadbeat* “husbands”, either. The State is over-ruling everyone, pay attention. No freedom of movement, like a slaughterhouse. It also rides roughshod over the new husband, whose rights are being denied.

*abandonment is Biblical grounds for divorce

Low funding or low IQ workers?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/nhs-baby-death-investigation-widens-maternity-unit-shrewsbury-telford-hospital-trust-a8516326.html

I’d bet both.

Diversity hire, always backfire.

They have many cover-ups involving forged qualifications, abuse cases and simple laziness, so they turn up and don’t do their job and expect to get paid or cry Racism! But all the money’s going to useless admin who hired them (cheaper than training) or retired NHS pensions (including more self-congratulating admin). The system is already overburdened, it was designed for something like a tenth of this population. It cannot survive.

People frequently die in A&E from preventable causes. That’s assuming you don’t get ill from the hospital itself.

A random club slut with an STD gets seen quickly, the kid with cancer is told “we can’t afford your treatment.” One is likelier to vote. There are literal death panels that decide these things, it’s all PR spin. All of it!

In answer to “why don’t more Brits have kids?”

They don’t wanna DIE???

In many areas, it’s like giving birth in a Third World country. Preppers have no idea. It’s that bad NOW. And if you think white women get better treatment, especially if they hear you’re a Christian, you don’t know much about Third World healthcare.

Then there’s post-partum scarring (lifelong), injury (bye bye sex life) and death from “complications” (common with C-sections, and you can’t get just one).

They “run out” of basic supplies! Needles! Pain relief! Cleaning alcohol!

It’s already at around Victorian level in places, at least they had pain relief, on track to be Middle Ages.

And you wonder why the smart people are saving to go on private? No use conceiving if the hospital will kill or kidnap it (to be abused).

Americans need to mind their own business when they don’t understand foreign systems.

And they don’t give out IVF to young, normal people. You need a PC reason. You need to be single, or getting a “sex change”, or really, really old. There are plenty of young men who think supplements in a drink once a day will magically keep them fertile when they’ve already lost and continue to lose fertility (while “young”, so in medical terms under 30-35) from the modern world – bike riding, phone radiation, smoking, drinking, promiscuity and STDs. This is not theoretical and they don’t know until years later, when the damage is mostly done and they wrongly blame “age”. The external nature of the male system makes it incredibly vulnerable to environmental factors!

And men are told they shouldn’t care about their fertility (red flag) and just assume it’s fine.

Bachelor culture shames them for admitting they care about their health!

They’ll shame a man for being infertile too. You’re trapped.*

Don’t get me started on the ones who are stupid enough to supplement hormones (one, let’s be honest) for vanity without constant supervision from a doctor, those ones deserve it. Magic beans don’t work.

“Lifestyle choices” PCspeak for the wages of sin.

*Reminds me of how the manosphere shames everyone about suicide rates but never talks about suicide prevention (seriously), or they shame abortions like it’s a purely female cause with immaculate conception and not the cult of promiscuity that led to it. There’s a disconnect where even the people online who pretend to notice, only address the symptom (controlled op?) and ignore the cause like it’ll fix itself by magic or because it’s “judging” – what, and judging symptoms of moral decay isn’t?

Politics ignore housewives at their peril

http://takimag.com/article/more_from_the_housewives_please_gavin_mcinnes/print#axzz41Und5V00
There is an issue with bringing in this standard. The new Muslim family down the road with 5 kids would have the most realistic opinion (it presumes monogamy). And if having children is required to possess a low time preference (correlation yes but what about young people, too poor to afford a family, being responsible?), we must rope men into it too, since they’re usually the most politically tuned in and run for most office.

If a man is a bachelor, his political opinion on the future must be irrelevant. There is some truth to this because, as he says, with no children, the person has no stake and on the contrary, betrays a lack of faith in the system as a whole. This is why there used to be such a thing as a bachelor tax, by no less than the mighty, manly Spartans, because they drain the system without paying back in with future workers/soldiers (and tried to make good wives become adulteresses). Women classically control the purse strings because women buy the food, clothes and other rarely considered aspects, like kitchen appliances, that the family needs. The man fills the purse, he doesn’t control it, and advertisers know this.
If the experience of women is so important, go with the most experienced: wives and mothers.

“That’s why we need to include housewives in the equation. I want them in aprons, too. Feminists will say wearing kitchen clothes and being on a first-name basis is demeaning, and that is because they’ve been brainwashed by Notorious RBG to think the kitchen is a jail cell. It’s not. An apron is a badge of honor. You don’t use it to get men fired or censored as childless women in the workforce (SJWs, some are male) seem so determined to do. You use it to create sustenance for the people you love. It’s a cape that’s on backwards. To be a “kept woman” means a man is keeping you—as opposed to throwing you away when you start looking old so he can go fuck someone else. Modern feminism is perfect for men because it’s all about getting the milk for free as they go from cow to cow.”

A+ and men don’t throw women away, boys do, since they don’t appreciate what they’ve got.

Feminism has handed men all the sex-based chips and they love it. Women are holding nothing, having lost the innate SMP advantage thanks to sluts (see the ‘economics of sex’). Men are responsible for the demise of women, as every generation, every century prior has protected us, yet this lot contribute to the problem of ruining them. And then they complain Where have all the good women gone? They were good prospects… until you Pump and Dumped them, dummies. You can’t make hos and complain about the paucity of housewives. Now players are caving and marrying up/breeding with sluts and frankly, they deserve each other.

There isn’t a study of the sexual partner count of men against divorce risk, they’re scared to gather the data, since most of the repeat divorces pushing the overall figure up are by men (Trump being a prime example) but they assure us as they manwhore around it can’t possibly affect their brain’s ability to pair bond, despite neurological evidence presented in books like Hooked, where the pair bonding ability (or lack thereof) operates the same in men and women (or, for the sluts, doesn’t). Would you want to marry someone who can’t love you? Who cannot physically draw the loyal connection required and stay when it’s tough? Oh, they can lust, but that’s all they can do, that novelty will wear off. And they’ll lust after others too. Does that sound like a good marriage prospect? They’re that playa with a side ho who lies and calls her GF so she can’t cheat too, but apparently cheating is fine? That’s the trashy mindset. R-types are rejected from the social consideration of marriage due to their deserved reputation. Bragging about it only draws in like, leave them to it.

n.b. Not that all housework is automatically Woman’s Work. That is a feminist myth. Men used to do appropriate work we now call DIY. Yeah, still housework. Working on the car? At the house. Fixing the appliances? At the house. Opening the jar? In the kitchen. Prior to the Industrial Revolution, spouses used to divide labour equally, the main difference being the forced required for those tasks. Yes, women tended to cook, but men still made tea as well as carrying things. It wasn’t a case of women being suited to Woman’s Work, but men being suited to the stuff requiring physical strength, Man’s Work.
In the UK at least, as I covered in the universal suffrage post, women swing elections and swing them conservative. If we’re being as obtuse as to pit one half of the family unit against the other (a house divided…), the woman is more right wing. The average working class husband tended to vote Labour/Left because they promised higher wages, every time, higher wages. Sadly, this gambit worked. When you think Social Conservative, a man doesn’t spring to mind, does it?
American women don’t seem to trust Hillary (especially her support of Bill). They voted in the Affirmative Action candidate last time and look what happened. Trump should have Palin as VP, it’d be great.

Women notice how you treat the rest of us

My best friend confessed his love for me but I can't love him back because of the way he's treated other girls.  

https://whisper.sh/js/embed.js

This is very common and often a hidden factor in women supposedly ‘leading men on’ with polite affection or ‘friendzoning’ that doesn’t seem to make sense. She’s seen how you behave in a romantic context and she doesn’t know that person. She doesn’t even like that person. One of the few times 2 ladders theory comes in. She ignores it when you’re just friends but when you try to herd her into that other pen, where, as she sees it, you’re mistreating women like animals or treating them as less than human, she’s smart to say no thanks. Probably one of the things you like about her is her self-respect.

We aren’t lemmings and we aren’t as stupid as (some of) you seem to think we are. At least on social matters. If a woman lets on though, or tries to explain, she gets accused of being manipulative, when it’s social intelligence. It’s the way most women are, it’s our thing, in fact we’re being honest and a deceptive person never would be. The guys who get defensive like that are digging their own social live’s graves. Since again, all the other women are watching him react and wonder why he doesn’t get it.

Men do not appreciate this fact (that women note down all the ways you’ve treated her sex in the past, like a man noting which of his female friends is the easiest lay or the most feminist) and can be quite shocked when it comes back to bite them later, when she based a decision based on this supposedly ‘unfair’ information. Women are social creatures. It’s like seeing if a man is good with children, animals or the waiter. Or whether he has nice shoes. All of these seemingly random things are trying to infer future treatment. 

It’s easy to fake being decent now, but in a week? In a month? In a year? She’s sorting out the time wasters.

A good friend can be a bad boyfriend. The men themselves object to this as shallow (nothing to do with looks) when it’s simply an acknowledgement that they’re better in one social role than another. Better behaved. It can seem like, when the standards are higher (relationship) and the situation more intimate, they can regress and become brattish and even the parents of toddlers find them high-maintenance. The adult men do this because they figure they’re always in control and the woman can never leave (like their own mother) despite how it’s a tester for a marriage and they’re failing badly. It should be the other way around and the person should get better to know the more intimate you are, this is mature. A person should be the best at their core. If they never mature, you get middle-aged men who still think they should be able to get away with the same callous behavior of a 15-year old. When his relationships keep failing, he’ll always blame the women, especially the bitches who dared to leave him (when they gave him a chance, tried to correct him and realized he’s a hopeless case).

I think this is what women used to mean they spoke of ‘nice guys’ but the wires got crossed and came to mean indecisive pushover (it doesn’t) when used. If he isn’t nice (as a non-sexual person in any context) after he has no further use for you, he isn’t nice. He was never nice. He was probably the inverse, totally fake and manipulative. And I bet he hates children and animals and waiters and others who can see through him.

A lot of men seem to think they have a free pass on their single actions because future women or other female prospects will just discount it. Nope, that’s what men do (boys will be boys is spoken by patient men who matured out of that stage). If you treat other women badly, or have done enough to get a reputation or some stories out there, it will put off women who were otherwise on the fence, like at the initial impressions stage and they might only see you as a friend or badly behaved brother-type at best, where you feel like you have to keep explaining yourself to other women (why do you hang out with him?) and explaining away his bad behaviour like he’s a child (Little Timmy only broke the window because he’s bored). It’s quite disgusting to imagine you’d be treated that way in future once the novelty has worn off, and this goes most of all for cheats. Once a cheat, always a cheat. The only type of woman that is OK with it is also a cheat. It seriously messes up their long-term prospect in the same way as a slut becomes unlikely mother of your children material.

You can’t erect a red flag or few and wonder why people avoid you.

Naturally, we rarely discuss this with men who tend to take it too personally (you’re judging me when we’re just friends???) since it never happens in male friendships (because they’re all the same sex) and it’s alien territory (it’s just how women work, son) so we try to hint with the nice guy stuff or making it really obvious by asking how you treat your sister or mother (women you have nothing to gain from sexually). Even in jest.

You kiss your mother with that mouth?

superman drinking give up nope

Hope this made sense.

p.s. This is why women walk around in groups aside from physical safety. It’s like the crow’s nest in war films or when soldiers stand back-to-back to get a 360 degree view. To watch what, do you think?

Quotes by Nikola Tesla on Mama Tesla

Yes, I’m calling her that. You can’t stop me.
Square brackets are me.
You can see how important she was to him. Read the damn book (My Inventions) yourself.

I must trace to my mother’s influence whatever inventiveness I possess

My mother descended from one of the oldest families in the country and a line of inventors.”

My mother was an inventor of the first order and would, I believe, have achieved great things had she not been so remote from modern life and its multifold opportunities.  She invented and constructed all kinds of tools and devices and wove the finest designs from thread which was spun by her.  She even planted the seeds, raised the plants and separated the fibers herself.  She worked indefatigably, from break of day till late at night, and most of the wearing apparel and furnishings of the home was the product of her hands.  When she was past sixty, her fingers were still nimble enough to tie three knots in an eyelash.”

“Of all things I liked books the best.  My father had a large library and whenever I could manage I tried to satisfy my passion for reading.  He did not permit it and would fly into a rage when he caught me in the act.  He hid the candles when he found that I was reading in secret.  He did not want me to spoil my eyes.  But I obtained tallow, made the wicking and cast the sticks into tin forms, and every night I would bush the keyhole and the cracks and read, often till dawn, when all others slept and my mother started on her arduous daily task. [She knew] On one occasion I came across a novel entitled “Abafi” (the Son of Aba), a Serbian translation of a well known Hungarian writer, Josika. This work somehow awakened my dormant powers of will and I began to practise self-control.  At first my resolutions faded like snow in April, but in a little while I conquered my weakness and felt a pleasure I never knew before—that of doing as I willed.  In the course of time this vigorous mental exercise became second nature.  At the outset my wishes had to be subdued but gradually desire and will grew to be identical.  After years of such discipline I gained so complete a mastery over myself that I toyed with passions which have meant destruction to some of the strongest men. …. On frequent occasions he [father] gave vent to his anger and contempt but my mother was different.  She understood the character of men and knew that one’s salvation could only be brought about through his own efforts.  One afternoon, I remember, when I had lost all my money and was craving for a game, she came to me with a roll of bills and said, “Go and enjoy yourself.  The sooner you lose all we possess the better it will be.  I know that you will get over it.” She was right.  I conquered my passion then and there and only regretted that it had not been a hundred times as strong.  I not only vanquished but tore it from my heart so as not to leave even a trace of desire.  Ever since that time I have been as indifferent to any form of gambling as to picking teeth.”

“Regaining my senses I realized with consternation that I was unable to visualize scenes from my life except those of infancy, the very first ones that had entered my consciousness.  Curiously enough, these appeared before my vision with startling distinctness and afforded me welcome relief.  Night after night, when retiring, I would think of them and more and more of my previous existence was revealed.  The image of my mother was always the principal figure in the spectacle that slowly unfolded, and a consuming desire to see her again gradually took possession of me.  This feeling grew so strong that I resolved to drop all work and satisfy my longing.  But I found it too hard to break away from the laboratory, and several months elapsed during which I had succeeded in reviving all the impressions of my past life up to the spring of 1892.  In the next picture that came out of the mist of oblivion, I saw myself at the Hotel de la Paix in Paris just coming to from one of my peculiar sleeping spells, which had been caused by prolonged exertion of the brain.  Imagine the pain and distress I felt when it flashed upon my mind that a dispatch was handed to me at that very moment bearing the sad news that my mother was dying.  I remembered how I made the long journey home without an hour of rest and how she passed away after weeks of agony! It was especially remarkable that during all this period of partially obliterated memory I was fully alive to everything touching on the subject of my research.  I could recall the smallest details and the least significant observations in my experiments and even recite pages of text and complex mathematical formulae.”

Supposed skeptics don’t like to discuss his psychic visions but it was integral to his process.

“… I reflected that the conditions for a look into the beyond were most favorable, for my mother was a woman of genius and particularly excelling in the powers of intuition. …”

The ones Einstein called crucial to genius. When looking for his purpose;

“Up to that time I never realized that I possessed any particular gift of discovery, but Lord Rayleigh, whom I always considered as an ideal man of science, had said so and if that was the case, I felt that I should concentrate on some big idea. At this time, as at many other times in the past, my thoughts turned towards my Mother’s teaching. The gift of mental power comes from God, Divine Being, and if we concentrate our minds on that truth, we become in tune with this great power. My Mother had taught me to seek all truth in the Bible; therefore I devoted the next few months to the study of this work.”

Manosphere /fake MGTOW claim: Women can’t do science or Women can’t invent

TLDR:

wrong dr house urgh shut up idiots

I think this claim in particular is ruining the manosphere. This post will be logic and science-heavy. For satirical reasons, and because I’m a little troll at heart with the other chanfags, I’m largely going to use resources written by men. Deny that, bitches!

Fake MGTOW still reading this:

The plight of stupid neolibs everywhere

I’m seeing this picked up increasingly by the sort of insecure moron who couldn’t invent a new form of toaster with a gun to his head. I would own them at robot wars. You can tell they don’t have a job in science (no, IT doesn’t count, tons of Indian women work in it ffs) and have never been to a single conference with their bitchy attitude. Example;

MGTOWERscienceclaimwrong

You know they’re desperate to prove how edgy they are when virginTOW is in their screen-name, Tyler Durden would be more original, or Mr Robot now I guess. MGTOW is being beset by the same sort of loser that drowned Reddit and Atheistkult, with the equivalent male virulence of SJWs to anything exposed to their entryism, and it’s no wonder the movement is now drowning under their dead weight. What’s the rule here from Greene’s Power book you need to heed?
http://48laws-of-power.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/law-10-infection-avoid-unhappy-and.html

It was written by a man so you should pay attention.

Aaron Clarey, another man, was right about these types (for those who don’t know to whom I refer);


They’re beta-omega bitches who feel the need to put women down to feel like men. That’s weak, it’s the reverse of what the feminists do. You shouldn’t need women for your ego as a real MGTOW at all, this is simply an inversion of the pedestal idea. You’re no less needy and I don’t like bullies full stop, feminist or virginTOW. Your sex, like your race, sexuality, whatever, is never a Free Pass. #meritocracyftw

Disclaimer for the whiners: yes, I know the feminist programmes are annoying. Insulting. Patronising. Unfair. They also don’t work, even in Norway. So it hardly matters, realistically. Remember, most women aren’t feminists (by self-report). We won’t do something we don’t want to (like take up extra maths classes). Don’t accept the feminist frame that what they want is what most women want. They don’t speak for us. That’s their Big Lie. Don’t hand them authority by treating them like one (vague TLP reference).

On the other hand, don’t excuse them. Don’t blame phrenology (you’re so scientific) for their dispute of agency, they have a choice to be bitches. They want that excuse, you’re handing them a victim card to play against you. And if you were up on your neuroscience, you’d see that while women have fewer brain cells, thanks to our smaller overall body size btw the ratio balances out, we have more connections. Guess what corresponds better to intelligence?

http://www.jneurosci.org/content/30/16/5519.full

Synaptic plasticity of connections. So pipe the fuck down on that front.
It would be just as specious as claiming women are superior because we have more absolute DNA material. (We do, the Y chromosome has decidedly less and is smaller than X). We have this for the evolutionary purpose of carrying children of both sexes. Group differences don’t make you better as an individual. This is basic statistics. You might have an average male IQ, but that doesn’t mean you’re smarter than every woman you’ll ever meet. Statistically, that would be implausible. Individual differences conflict more than group level because the variance is higher. Since a man invented IQ (Binet) I assume you’d take the prospect seriously.

keep being cocky, see where it gets you

While on the topic of scientist misogyny, most of STEM isn’t. Modern STEM. You aren’t being cool by claiming something as the common opinion (women>suck) that anyone in the industry knows is a MSM lie, it’s as bad as fake gamer girls. Feminazis have finally turned on the Valley, all those Asian and Jewish boys, to try and score some of that sweet sweet VC money. They’ve failed, on the whole. Laughably failed.
Historical scientists usually had a single bad experience they allowed to colour their lives (e.g. Kant Kant Kant Kant Kant and KANT  – talk to women). They were high on a personality trait called Psychoticism, good for their work but awful for their personal life, so it didn’t go well for them and they never tried again (source on genius written by two men, doubleplusgood).

Playing Subject Monopoly is petty. “They” have that subject, “we” have this. It’s the Robber’s Cave false opposition all over again (famous study by a man involving all boys). At the end of the day, it doesn’t mean anything. We’re all working to improve society, and that helps everyone. It’s a social good, it cannot be selective. My monarch is a woman, it doesn’t mean I had anything to do with that. Tesla was a man, the men reading this had nothing to do with that. Have icons for certain, but sex isn’t like race, there isn’t enough genetic connection throughout the group as a whole to claim kinship to accomplishment (HBD reference, check out Jayman, who is yes, a man).

Role call anyway. Subject Monopoly. You feel lucky?

joker DC smile smirk evil grin lol haha

Composers. – Male. The greats were pretty much all male. You win that round, I was discussing composers on a bus once with all-female music students and everyone agreed. As you can imagine, no one present was offended nor a feminist.

Does that make you feel better? It shouldn’t. Modern music is shit (see example comment above). Relative quality isn’t the same realm as absolute greatness.

Exploration – Male. Women usually weren’t allowed out of the house without an escort when places remained for the picking but sure, I’ll let you have that one. But the Vikings got there first, by thousands of years, and half of those were women (they traveled as one unit, look it up, archaeology and history). Are you descended from Vikings? I am. Does this mean I have more claim to that success than you, likely American man? Identity politics by sex is a bust whoever is doing it. By race, with a level of genetic relatedness to claim ingroup status (male science!) it might be supportable, still a big May-Be.

Still, so what? Does that improve the life of any man reading this? Inspiration shouldn’t be used in place of your own accomplishment or ambition (see fandom crazies). That’s co-dependent bullshit. It’s an excuse to do nothing with your own life.

Research … about even. Scientists? Well, until about a century ago women couldn’t get degrees. But still, women now dominate in biology and medicine, which the manosphere complains about, although there are fewer high IQ women than men for sample availability reasons, but also because of this more low IQ men than women. Feeling especially stupid because the male sex contains more retards? 

Thought not.

The modern average researcher is Asian. By simple data, they far outnumber us crackers. The average MGTOW is a middle class spoiled white bitch. You have less in common with him (HBD, genetics) than you do the women in your country you complain about.

Men are better in physics and materials, aka the Harder Sciences instead of Life Science. This is a fair, gendered difference. Ok….

snort lol laugh haha hmph derision yeah duh really uhuh mhmm princess bride

I’m waiting to see how playing to a sex’s strengths for the common good of society is somehow a bad thing? When the manosphere claims that is the Way Things Should Be. (See the Is/Ought guillotine, by a man). Women in the more caring, nurturing roles? Men in the more technical, mathey ones? It’s almost like they’re suggesting women should be blocked from all roles of responsibility, but we already have a shortage of doctors and scientists in the West (Asia outnumbering us again) and if you’re ill, dying in A&E, would you really reject the assistance of a doctor based on her sex? Would you do the same to a black man? Or would you just want a Doctor, any Doctor, now-now-now? That’s the weird thing about positions of responsibility, they are also positions of trust. The tort of law, the duty of care, which sex do you trust to be more caring when your life is on the line?
If your argument to do this female career block is Muh Meritocracy, I’ve already told you why that’s BS. Were you smart enough to see it? If we tightened the requirements based purely on merit, men would suffer more than women. Because more men are retarded from the original population group and hence, by that logic, blocked from professions, than women.

Unintended consequences;

There would be more female scientists and more female doctors, purely based on the starting numbers from IQ.

You didn’t think this through, did you?

eric ooh aah umm uhuh play dumb smile laugh evil grin

Now I get to the meat of this argument, the crux that really pisses me off: Invention. It’s a subject most people (and the manosphere) don’t understand because they believe MSM and Hollywood. They’ve probably never met a real inventor (not Hamburger Headphones types) in their entire lives, yet still feel qualified to discuss the group. I was actually discussing inventors with Henry Dampier in private once (yes, he’s a man, cool guy) and he knows a lot of them, without quoting him without his permission, his opinion was favourable and he appreciated the variety within the occupation (realistic, not the crazy hair crazy men film trope based on Einstein, not really an inventor either). Ask yourself, redpills, how this MSM lie conflicts with the real field full of real people you’re insulting, some of which blog here or know people who blog here (hi!) in the reactosphere.

When did you ever see a film about a female inventor? How many have you seen about male inventors? Compared to the fair hypothetical assumptions prior to evidence of a 50/50 split, or a biased one of 25/75, there’s something odd going on here (and we all know Hollywood is run by Jewish men, they admit it). We certainly know there are high IQ women in existence, it is possible and they must exist. Yet they aren’t in the media, it doesn’t fit Narrative (Einstein was a Jew, remember, his position in Hollywood tropes is no accident). Since the MGTOWER commentator wanted ancient examples, Hypatia is the best, estimated (by men) to have an IQ over 200, a true polymath. She was raised that way deliberately – by her father. This suggests the sexes are highly plastic in their epigenetic potential. Isn’t the manosphere begging for more geniuses? Would they reject the World’s Greatest Genius if they turned out to have a cracking pair of tits too? How would that not constitute actual, real misogyny? Does that polymathy of Hypatia make a random feminist smarter, or you, individual male readers, dumber? Of course fucking not. Cut it out. That’s magical thinking. I won’t tolerate that in a discussion on science.

that's enough stop please karen will and grace

Opposite example for fairness: Ada Lovelace was a smart cookie. No doubt. High IQ. But most of ‘her’ accomplishments were actually those of Babbage, she was the PR for his ideas, that’s why he hired her, yet the feminists are doing the exact same thing with the sexes inverted: rejecting the Great Computer Genius – because penis envy. Don’t be like the feminists, please. You don’t need to put anyone down for something they couldn’t help e.g. sex, which is determined exclusively by the fathers btw. Lovelace frequently discussed Babbage’s work with credit for example, don’t turn on her either, one of the people trying to contribute to the world we all have to live in. Focus on the correct enemy, the people who lie, the talentless, the professional whiners.

The same people in the manosphere who shout down Edison (a man) will demand all male invention is sublime and perfect in the next breath, if it means they can put down a whole sex in the breath afterward (women, actual misogyny). I don’t use the word lightly, it’s the whole 100% group without factual basis (in fact opposed to it) yet they think they’re being subtle! It’s that obvious, it’s becoming common and it reeks of keyboard alpha weakness and confirmation bias. It’s 100%, completely obvious to neutral outsiders what they’re doing, and that’s why normal people (including men who smell BS) are being turned off the manosphere recently. IMHO.

I could list Male Inventors versus Female, but that’s a red herring. It doesn’t account for qualification, expense, historical prominence, legend, scale, lives changed, just general quality. It’s a similar problem in the patent system at the moment and the world law (inc EU) is gearing toward changes intended to assess objective quality. Superficial comparisons like that go for the fame whores instead, like Edison. Who also hired women and wrote his name on their inventions too, since we’re so useless…

American Psycho is the best satire of the 20th century

I could take the easy ironic potshot and remind you that without Hedy Lamarr the porn star (cracking pair of tits) you wouldn’t have this WiFi to bitch about how women are incapable of invention.
And the Allies might have lost WW2 because the Nazis were ahead on signal science prior. 
These are facts.

You know what I think bugs them, the fake MGTOWs? In the realm of speculation here, admittedly.

– Equality of opportunity. 
They honestly believed that women were inferior on all flanks thanks to MSM erasure, so when the outcomes began to even out from proof, they felt personally insecure. Like the men returning from war and seeing their replacements in the munitions factories, the world didn’t end. They were replaceable. After the Hell of war, they realized their work was disposable as their lives. Women already have the innate capacity to create life so womb envy might factor in their desperation to the claim of machine-creation ownership, as if innate to their sex, as well (hey, I mentioned penis envy above, it logically follows if one exists, so must the other).

IN CONCLUSION.

I’ll leave you by one crucial example to refute this fallacious claim. Really, it’s irrefutable without being logically incoherent aka lying.
Who is the Greatest Modern Inventor?

….

Say it aloud.

….

….

….

….
A lot of you said Tesla. Correct.
I assume you mean Nikola?

what wut robot stop eh hold presses a moment

It’s rumoured that Albert Einstein was once asked, “How does it feel to be the smartest man alive?”, he responded, “I don’t know, you’ll have to ask Nikola Tesla.”

This is a fair assumption and I believe it myself.

After all, Hedy’s work required electricity.

But what the manosphere and MGTOW overlap never asks, to cover this truth, is what Nikola Tesla himself thought.

The same man who thought that women, innately, without the corrupting influence of society, were superior to men?

“I had always thought of woman,” says Mr. Tesla, “as possessing those delicate qualities of mind and soul that made her in these respects far superior to man. I had put her on a lofty pedestal, figuratively speaking, and ranked her in certain important attributes considerably higher than man. I worshiped at the feet of the creature I had raised to this height, and, like every true worshiper, I felt myself unworthy of the object of my worship.”

“This struggle of the human female toward sex equality will end in a new sex order, with the female as superior…. 

His prediction is coming true. These weak manboys I’ve covered before are threatened by equality of opportunity, by more competition on the professional playing field, in the same way ugly men are threatened by the open sexual marketplace, where the women rush the best men, when previously Patriarchy would have guaranteed them sex – with a wife.
By keeping that larger, smarter (on average, see Doctor outcome) group from the meritocratic opportunity of the marketplace, they selfishly help themselves individually – at the expense of freedom (individual human/woman), self-actualization (psychological) and the common social good of the progress that competition brings otherwise (making them liars when they call for this improvement in STEM and ask whine it isn’t happening fast enough).

It is not in the shallow physical imitation of men that women will assert first their equality and later their superiority, but in the awakening of the intellect of women.

Through countless generations, from the very beginning, the social subservience of women resulted naturally in the partial atrophy or at least the hereditary suspension of mental qualities which we now know the female sex to be endowed with no less than men.

But the female mind has demonstrated a capacity for all the mental acquirements and achievements of men, and as generations ensue that capacity will be expanded; the average woman will be as well educated as the average man, and then better educated, for the dormant faculties of her brain will be stimulated to an activity that will be all the more intense and powerful because of centuries of repose. Woman will ignore precedent [DS: set by men] and startle civilization with their progress.”

what wut wtf shock surprise slow turn eh littlefinger pause got

Yeah, they don’t like to talk about that part. #bluepillpussies
Nor WHY. Why did he think this way about women, psychologically? He took no wife, no lovers. It must’ve been earlier than that. Childhood, from social learning theory. In Victorian times?! Who was this creature?!! The role model, the proof of concept (real POC, real MVP represent). Where did the genes come from, for his vital visualization skills?

The reason little Nikola went into invention in the first place? The reason we know his name now? Who encouraged him? Who raised him? Who he modelled himself after? If you read his autobiography, My Inventions, you’ll know. A fellow inventor, in his mind, the best inventor: his mother.

That’s right, a woman!

Going by his own, male account. I’ll post a few choice quotes by Tesla about Mama Tesla just to drive home the point: https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2015/09/17/quotes-by-nikola-tesla-on-mama-tesla/

When you hear these false excuses, claims that

  • Women can’t do science.
  • Women can’t inspire men to be men (aka mothers are useless).
  • Most of all, Women can’t invent.

Your idol says you’re wrong.
Don’t be a little bitch about it. Bitch is a verb as well as a noun.

Takehome: Read books on a niche subject before claiming to know diddly squat about it.

I’ll leave you with a quote about the woman, when it comes to claiming what you’ve no right to;

My mother understood human nature better and never chided. She knew that a man cannot be saved from his own foolishness or vice by someone else’s efforts or protests, but only by the use of his own will.

It’s alright, I won’t rub your nose in it. Then I’d be as petty as you.
Please just learn from this and quit lying.