Not to be demeaning but

The desire to dominate is a result of testosterone and feeling threatened all the time. Why do you think gym bros are the most jealous and possessive of their girlfriends?

This is true, any intelligent person- male or female- is studying math or physics.

>equating academia to serious philosophy

Ahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahaha

that was a good one.

>Witless assumption about OP.
>Talks about bullshit not related to philosophy.
>Generalizes bullshit to all of history.
At least please tell us this happened in the philosophy department.

Gym bros aren't and it doesn't just have to do with testosterone. And I mean more than just dominate but simple building and creating itself. There's a reason the ancients associated women with the moon, they just reflect, they have no spark of creation, no capacity for genius. You shouldn't hate them for this though, they genuinely don't understand anything else and they actually like being that way, no matter how disgusting it would be for most men.

Tbh most men who are into philosophy are also retarded. Not all feminism is tumblr feminism, and while women interested in philosophy may identify as feminist they're probably not the caricatures you think they are. Also, many women who would call themselves feminists do not want to dedicate themselves to gender theory or identity politics.

The issue here is that "minority" groups are expected to be ambassadors for their group by people who control media and publishing platforms. Black authors in particular have run into issues with publishers when their work isn't race-related. The content you see is mediated by the choices of others, and their criteria is not entirely meritocratic. There's also the tendency to mostly notice things that confirm your previously-held beliefs.

It's a shame that philosophy is relegated to academia these days, but where else do you see "serious philosophy" being done? I would genuinely like to find some modern philosophy being done outside academia. I believe molding yourself to fit into that system shapes the way you structure your thoughts in a way that is impossible to see in yourself.

Agreed, I think. My personal identity is not tied up with being "a victim of the patriarchy," but frequently I find myself in places where I'm the only woman around and I do think about why that's the case, what other women might be doing "wrong" that's keeping them away. You have to be the sort of woman that men want to be around, without becoming the sort of woman men like solely out of romantic/sexual interest. In practice, this means being intelligent (i.e. noticeably smarter than most men, but it has to be something people naturally see in you. No one likes a show off), being funny/"chill", having well-developed opinions and taste on a wide variety of subjects, being assertive without being aggressive or combative, avoiding talk about women's issues unless you are asked, and, last but not least, being pretty. If you can do this, you can sit at the boys table and people will listen to you. Is this the way things "should" be? Probably not, but I personally am more interested in finding ways to excel within the confines of the system I've found myself in then spending my life chipping away at institutions that are deeply entrenched.

Fields like philosophy, where innate talent is believed to be the main determinant of success, obviously have fewer women. Contrary to what alt-woke 4channers would have you believe, this is not because the world lacks brilliant, talented women who could excel in these fields. But the stereotype is that even smart women are not capable of being geniuses the way men are. The "smart woman" is stereotyped as hard-working, diligent, and studious but without the spark that brilliant men have (as you've just demonstrated). I expect some of you are thinking of the fact that men's iq's have a larger standard deviation than those of women, so men really ARE the only ones capable of genius. Let's assume this is entirely caused by biology (in reality, this is still being debated). At IQs of 140+ (precise scores past this point are not meaningful), a conservative estimate of the gender ratio is still about 60:40. People citing the greater male variability hypothesis seem not to know this. They argue as though they believe the upper end of the range is >95% men. It's possible men and women may never reach parity in some disciplines. But based on the results of IQ tests, we are still missing out on the contributions of many brilliant women to philosophy and other male-dominated fields. Many women are capable of the same creativity and intelligence of male geniuses. Denying the existence of historic and current social barriers to female achievement is sticking your head in the sand.

Lol, where are these mathematical contributions to society? They're all ugly as shit and/or impossibly destructive.

>Probably not, but I personally am more interested in finding ways to excel within the confines of the system I've found myself in then spending my life chipping away at institutions that are deeply entrenched.
That hit home. I am "chill" in that men tend to like me in a non romantic way, and I've just kind of accepted that.

Philosophy has quite a lot of women in it. Hipparchia was considered equal or superior to most of the Cynic school in Athens by philosophers. Hildegaard of Bingen was massive in the middle ages. Simone Weil probably scared Trotsky more than the icepick.

However, those are not most women, like most philosophers are not most men, and most great philosophers like the above overshadow their contemporaries/successors. There's a reason why you've heard of Aristotle but probably not Theophrastus, who wrote the bits of Aristolean philosophy from the First Peripatetic which still stand up today (e.g. he's probably the author of on colours, which says the dress is not blue and black but gold and white in shadow.) Aristotle got memed more throughout history because Theophrastus inherited his school, and so memed Aristotle more than he did his contribution to the corpus being distinct in authorship.

>feminism
>almost every woman who's into philosophy is a feminist
No, you just live in America or some other shithole, and have little contact with philosophy in general. That why basic bitches can lie to you and not get their dress taken off them to check how into cynical anaideia they are.