Male """writers""" btfo

God bless Google's diversification program for giving that man a job. And he's white! So progressive

Very interesting. Why not blind submissions though?

>caring about the opinions of women

because that would lead to worse results for women

Every single time blinded submissions in STEM disciplines are done, women perform worse than they do normally.
I'm not shitting you, people have repeatedly come out and said that blinded submissions are sexists.

Tbh I like initiatives that bring women into big tech companies cause most guys are faggots who just cause constant drama, and think that working in an office is the same as battling other employees (they actually read sun tzu and try to apply it to being a middle manager and think it's normal). Then they come up with retarded unworkable ideas and try really hard at them because they think they'll "win" if it works, not cause of any business need. At least you can have a conversation with the average woman

That should say
>Women tend to be better at writing than men.
not
>Women tend to write better than men.
which is just an ugly sentence

>women tend to write better than men
holy shit grow tf up

>the appalling amount of leftie Jew slaves on this board will defend this

Disgusting

nothing polemic about women having a higher verbal IQ

Ever notice that it's okay to publish headlines such as "women fitter then men", "women write better than men", "white people more (something bad) than (minority)"?

But it's verboten to even acquire data that may suggest superiority of a trait by white males.

I've been an editor for two different magazines, one female oriented and one male oriented. The average female writer is head and shoulders over the average male, including every idiot in this thread.

But the best writers are men, there are just fewer. And they tend to create more engineered, thought out masterpieces.

Women know how to omit properly. See:

This is the most soy post on this board in over 5 years.

I hope you're joking, I really do. Or you're just a woman. Or a fag.

Do you have a source for this?

I'm in research and review papers all the time for journals, but I can't recall ever paying attention if the author is male or female...

Nope, male big tech employee

And whites are better writers and speakers than blacks. What's your point?

This is the worst post I've ever experienced on Veeky Forums.

Off yourself

Just because hundreds of men work construction jobs doesn't mean they wouldn't be as good of writers as the women in offices.

I run a blind submissions literary journal online.

Every single one we accepted last month was from a male author. Women are too clumsy and cannot write poetry for shit. I'm saying this as someone who's seen at least a thousand poems submitted by women.
Usually, women can write a good prose piece, but men still write better. Also, Indians are awful writers.

Women are told they can do anything. But that's really not true...

No I agree with him.

And this is me
The reason why THAT post is kind of ok, is because he is right about that second point. The workplace IS NOT a battlefield. This is a tremendous misconception. He's wrong that less men should be in it, because that's the future we are destined for, as we replace physical labor by machinery. However, it is certainly not a battlefield.

Black spoken rhetoric kicks whitey's ass. Not even meming. Find me your best white spoken rhetoric and I will blow you out.

Point is women are better verbally, on average.

Women are not reliable workers.

The only time women are seen to be constantly reliable are "low"-tier jobs like cooking or being maids. Those are the real hard working women of this world. Not sally of the tech company who brings donuts and sits at a computer taking calls and asking the man next to her how to do something she's expected to know.

It's reality. It just doesn't fit the worldview you constructed from youtube, Veeky Forums, and pua forums. I have experience with this, you have a theory. You sound like someone you'd hate.

Why does this board worship blacks?

I'm beginning to think you're all just brainwashed 15 year olds who surf buzzfeed and have an adopted African child.

I could not foresee the amount of deterioration reddit could bring within a year.

And somehow when something like this is said it's /pol/? Because I don't have white guilt? Is this what you're learning at university today?

>women scientists discover that women in science have an internal celestial body

This is academic writing you stupid nigger, this is not Veeky Forums go to Veeky Forums to troll

Poetry is for men to widdle away at, despite never being able to reach the level of Emily Dickinson, no matter how hard they meme.

Shut the fuck up. I know you're trolling but try harder

We have more women submit their shifty poetry about their vaginas and how sad their life is than than we have men submit theirs at all.

It's from studying rhetoric, stupid. Something you haven't done, clearly. You mix charismatic preaching with human and civil rights abuses and you get amazing stuff.

You don't have to be ignorant and racist, you can opt for regular racism.

Sounds like you online poetry zine is terrible. Emily Dickinson still rules American poetry. It's not even a question.

>You sound like someone you'd hate.
I do?

Then I WOULD hate myself? If what? What is the additional criteria?

I literally work around women all day and we have a good time. If you are sitting around thinking to yourself that a specific gender is better at something, you're retarded.

>Ayo nigga I dindu nuffin yo

You're right. These negroid orators are amazing!

What a Pathetic statement. You're probably white too

youtube.com/watch?v=fmO-ziHU_D8

damn....... what amazing eloquence...........

Additional criteria is thinking your reaction through. Your theory doesn't match reality being reported to you. You're sticking with your theory.

Based on your memey reply, I'm assuming you have opinions on egalitarianism, mainly that the theory doesn't match the facts and that people pushing for Everyone
Is the Same and Race Doesn't Real, or whatever, that they should kill themselves.

And reflecting on the post I'm replying to, yeah you don't seem to like yourself :^(

I hate Americans and their constant desire to compete and prove themselves at everything, it's so boring and tiresome.

At least in the old days you went to the moon, invented the internet, orchestrated the Berlin Airlift. Now you waste everybodys time with this shit.

>you went to the moon
German scientists got them there

>invented the internet
Tim Berners-Lee was British

Obviously I don't mean this trash.

Post a youtube link of the best white orator you can think of. You probably won't, since this isn't your territory and are just mad about black people contributing anything to any area.

I love myself, and the women I'm around like me, and the girl I'm interested in likes me. I like myself.

Unfortunately, you're wrong. That's the bottom line. Women are not better at writing than men are. Your justification is how things are, and that's not a justification, that's just deterministic.

Better than sitting on our hands like all of Europe.

>expecting euros to know anything

The internet was a Darpa project for 20 years but you know what I mean.

It's like when liberals talk about the leader of the free world, cold war has been over 25 years, but they still cling to it desperate to prove something.

They have no insight, no imagination, nothing to offer the world of any kind, so they change the criterias for subjective fields and dress it in biological essentialism to prove they have value.

It's actually not, in many cases. Go join a major corporation and you'll realize that most work people do is less valuable than doing nothing, but they do it because their competitive middle manager wants a "win" and starts directing them to do random (usually stupid) shit.

>expecting euros to know anything
this amerifat doesn't even notice my referring to americans as "them"

Maybe you're on levels of irony that I can't perceive... But this is one of the creepier posts I've seen.

The average female can write better than the average male is my point. Worse is that there is good data backing this up, not just my own experience as an editor (and not of an online e-poetry zine). Women on average have higher verbal IQs. So what.

>complains about Americans arguing and wasting time
>euroshit does the same thing

Not that I'd expect anything else from a Eurabian

Oh boy here we go with IQs, a largely behavioral test designed to make people who think or act certain ways feel better about themselves.

This is determinism in action, folks! And here we've got a ripe one. You're in the wrong place, retard.

Can't think, can't write. Break the stereotype, lads. Europe used to be a beautiful place with beautiful minds.

>a largely behavioral test

Nigger what, how is basic spatial reasoning behavioral?

Prediction and measurement isn't determinism. I guess you've been backed into a corner and are trolling.

You know you can just say nothing and no one would notice the backed into the corner thing...

youtube.com/watch?v=lgZegNgm8N4

this lecture i'm listening to at this very moment is a finer example of eloquence than anything blacks have ever accomplished

Ah but your point was the verbal IQ. If any part of IQ is behavioral or learned behavior, it's definitely that part.

But the whole thing is definitely an invalid way of approaching intelligence. Objectivity in matters of how you think doesn't make sense, and is inherently deterministic

If she took those knickers off would she die?

>and is inherently deterministic

I'm starting to think your issue with verbal IQ is you must score pretty low it

I'm 100% born and raised American. My family has literally been here since before the revolution.

This made me laugh desu. But seriously, you don't have any examples? You know this was a lazy non-attempt.

Of course. But what is actually probably most likely is that I didn't take the test at all, or can't even remember the score from when I did take it.

Thus showing that you're wrong and also dumb at assuming things.

Try not to assume.

>switches ground
I-if we move away from behaviorally observed data AND measured data ma-maybe I can still be right?

NOTHING IS TRUE AND I'M ALWAYS RIGHT

Lmao

you're thinking of nu-males and silicon valley-types, not men

I'm not assuming anything. I'm making an observation you clearly struggle with higher level semantics

And Jews, don't forget the Jews

IQ is a statistic. It doesn't matter what test you are given. All that matters is the ranking. You have a 100 people you give them 100 different test on any subject then you rank them. People that score high tends to score high across domains no matter what subject. People on the bottom stay in the bottom too. The only argument against IQ are domains where there's no clear way to rank people or physical tests. Well even in physical domains, you can't be a retarded and the people at the top have above average IQ.

...

I disagree with almost everything you wrote, but I will say that I vastly prefer having a female boss over a male boss for many reasons. Mostly because they're nicer in general, less competitive and pushy which is easier on my ego, more forgiving of my aspie tendancies, and if they're MILF's I end up developing a crush on them and work harder to impress them.

Now you're just being butthurt that I'm right.
How so? I have made an assertation that the IQ test is invalid because associated with the philosophy of determinism. You have said nothing to support your test other than the countless lies parroted across the board in support of this test. The very fact that intelligence is trying to be measured objectively shows how far we have fallen. After all, intelligence and the way a person thinks is all subjective, being subject to how much of an individual that person is, and how able he is to exercise his will on reality around him. You have no idea how this intelligence test kills people's souls and helps categorize them into different lines of thought. This might be pretty bad, considering certain schools of thought reinforce and validate the IQ test, among other lines of thought objectifying intelligence, and also Darwinism, the school of thought that a person SHOULD be ranked against others in this way.

You just are helping reinforce an inherently negative system that's all. Me and many others are against this very system of thought.

Also, what is so smart about saying the same thing that everyone else does, retard? Try reading some insightful books into the nature of the spirit or soul. Instead, you fool yourself into thinking 100% of scientific progress and development is correct. And that just has never been the case. Especially for a relatively new theory like evolution.

Lol I like that this has the shanty and lace curtain irish

I really don't want to irationally hate women because I know 90% of women and men are equaily shit but this kind of stuff makes me really mad
God, look at those retarded smug faces

Cowering, shaking his idiocy. It's over, you're wrong.

And you know I'm not.

But here the show is over for you, because whereas I posted something unique, individually satisfying and inherently existential in its scope, you have posted what a scientific journal would say. Again, exactly the problem here.

The sad part is, lord knows if we were in a room with women some of you might not stick to your principles because you wanted to get laid. And that is exactly the problem.

>because associated with the philosophy of determinism.

You're a fucking retard who is oblivious to how much you're misusing terms. The word you're thinking of is essentialism not determinism you stuttering idiot.

Ah, falling back into your endless featherbed of memes. Okay, see yah! Go read about IQ, stupid.

That's naive. The world isn't so nice.
I'll agree that IQ isn't everything but it's still valid in predicting success. You don't need to be 140+ but if you're too low you are fucked. 120 seems to be the sweet spot that says if you work hard you can be successful in whatever field you enter. There's also the autism aspect where individuals can be hyperfocus on one domain. But don't be a retard and say intelligence is not measurable at all. If it wasn't, we wouldn't have a word for it.

hurrr durrr

>The world isn't so nice.
And this is exactly the stupid mentality killing the world.

The world is that nice, and can be that nice as I have proven. Go back to sucking the teat of some meaningless IQ test you took that is becoming more meaningless because I exist and you know who I am.

I would rather not. If you talk to enough people and are on the east coast of America you would know who I was.

Not at all. Read some Kierkegaard.

In reality, it seems most people on here are either just nervous about admitting they know the person this post is coming from even though it is a 'anonymous' imageboard or they are nervous because they are wrong.

Look alive retards, you're wrong and finally someone who can talk to most people can prove it. You are probably assblasted right now sitting in your seat saying that Tyler fucking owned you by showing you that most people around his location agree with his philosophy and mentality towards life.

What is even more, he is around women most of the time these days and you aren't! Yet here you virgins are, on the internet, trying to seem like women are somehow smarter or better at typing than men are, and you're fucking wrong and now the whole world knows that I am the one with the ability making this post. Good day.

Oh yeah and if you want to re-read this post because you can't believe someone actually said this fucking awesome shit I won't blame you.

No, I don't hate myself, I love myself.

IQ seems pretty fucked from what I've seen. That's not to say it's useless (obviously someone with a 90IQ is dumber than someone with a 130IQ) G factor is more objective and unchangeable from person to person, but it seems harder to measure.

I'd disagree that hard work is the main factor in success, at least academically, especially once you get above 130IQ or so. There are plenty of very smart, very hard working people that I've come across that don't achieve anything special since they're hyper-obedient when it comes to following established routes of scientific knowledge. These are the kinds of people who treat string theory or frequentist statistics as objective facts and learn the most advanced equations in those fields like they were the words of God. In science creativity is incredibly important if you want to break ground. That means understanding that scientific paradigms are changeable and non-objective.

Goonan?

I think we just broke this dude

No bud I did say my name in the post if you can read.
A cowards way out. Everyone knows you are a coward.

Also, I am followed around fairly frequently by people trying to converse with me about things of this nature. Please try to keep up.

It reads like Goonan.

You don't say?

Interesting defense and interesting thing to say.

Verrrrry interesting.

It really does, desu.

>reddit spacing

>I've been an editor for two different magazines
no you havent

You're thinking about creativity which is a different measurement. Creativity goes up with IQ up to about 120 and then it stops correlating. This is to be expected because IQ is about finding rigid patterns where creativity is freeform creating your own patterns. Creativity can be trained to a greater extent than I.Q. naturally since it is simply doing whatever has not been done before. For example evolution is highly creative but really fucking stupid.

Youre a big guy ;)

Maybe he didn't but I have and the statement is correct.

tfw no nice forgiving qt milf boss

only men know true suffering. Even if it's not well written book, I'll choose the men's over the women's

I have no problem believing this; women generally read more and have a more developed empathetic system than men do. But I wonder how many of the people citing this would have trouble believing the studies that show that men are better at math and science than women are?

This is literally about writing academic papers, which is hardly literature. Has absolutely no place for discussion in this forum

READ IT YOU FAGGOTS

I use readability scores TO TEST IF WOMEN ARE HELD TO HIGHER STANDARDS IN ACADEMIC
PEER REVIEW. I find: (i) female-authored papers are 1–6 percent better written than
equivalent papers by men; (ii) the gap is almost two times higher in published arti-
cles than in earlier, draft versions of the same papers; (iii) women’s writing gradually
improves but men’s does not—meaning the readability gap grows over authors’ ca-
reers. Within a subjective expected utility framework, I exploit authors’ decisions to
show that TOUGHER EDITORIAL STANDARDS AND/OR BIASED REFEREE ASSIGNMENT ARE UNIQUELY
CONSISTENT WITH THE OBSERVED PATTERN OF CHOICES. A conservative causal estimate de-
rived from the model suggests SENIOR FEMALE ECONOMISTS WRITE AT LEAST 9 PERCENT MORE
CLEARLY THAN THEY OTHERWISE WOULD. I then document evidence THAT HIGHER STANDARDS
AFFECT BEHAVIOUR AND LOWER PRODUCTIVITY. First, FEMALE-AUTHORED PAPERS TAKE HALF A
YEAR LONGER IN PEER REVIEW. Second, as women update beliefs about referees’ stan-
dards, THEY INCREASINGLY MEET THOSE STANDARDS BEFORE PEER REVIEW. The latter response
disguises external thresholds as personal choice; the former reduces women’s output.
Both whitewash discrimination. More generally, TOUGHER STANDARDS IMPOSE A QUANTI-
TY/QUALITY TRADEOFF THAT CHARACTERISES MANY INSTANCES OF FEMALE OUTPUT. They could re-
solve persistently lower—otherwise unexplained—female productivity in many high-
skill occupations.

She is saying that women write better BECAUSE THEY ARE HELD TO A HIGHER STANDARD THAN MEN.
TOUGHER EDITORS MEANS BETTER WRITING?!?!? NOOOOOOO SHHHHIIIIITTTT!!!!

there's no need to be upset

Maybe if their work was better then they wouldn't need to write more clearly