Can his post a female historical figure that clearly have surpassed 99% of males?

>Donna Catherine de Medici
>head Mafia boss of the Bourbon Family

Loves that fuckin women and every goddamn beautiful moment that she ran France like it was 1940's New York City under control of the Sicilian Mafia.

Artemisia I of Caria.

Arguably the only real winner of the Greco-Persian wars.

i dunno, this?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ching_Shih

>example of someone who's read quick blurbs
read my last sentence, asshole. i already stated what you did in the last sentence of my post

Sayyida al Hurra
Or something like that

Hypatia was pretty smart. And though it violates the 25 year rule, Janet Yellen is pretty badass. There are plenty of female rulers who were incredibly clever, albeit not necessarily geniuses in the traditional sense.

how is that relevant to the question?

nobel committee to be fair is rather inclusive. keep in mind there are two people with nobel peace prizes who turned their eyes from genocide after receiving the awards. both women who achieved some power in a third world nation, and did nothing more significant than that. they received awards because they are women.

You're not answering the question very well

That doesn't detract from their intelligence, only their ethical authority, if any.

I don't know where you get the idea that my argument was about intelligence. clearly I was demonstrating the embarrassment in using the nobel committee as a basis in an argument.

if you want me to touch intelligence, though, that's easy. find a relatively accepted model of the positions that require the most intelligence to achieve(richest, most self-made rich, most socially accepted as significant inventions/discoveries, most leaders/ceos, etc. etc.) and compare how many men there are to women. if you have another metric, please explain, but by this one, women start looking pretty retarded.

To be fair, lots of deserving women didn't get the nobel prize on account of their being women as well, historically speaking

that doesn't make using the nobel prize committee in an argument any stronger.

i didn't have the literature or the peace prized in mind desu cause those have become memes at this point. bob dylan has a nobel prize in literature and barack obama a nobel peace prize lmao. I'm pointing to the science prizes, where i count around 17 women winning prizes in the chemistry, physics and medicine/physiology. Men, of course, overwhelm this number but it goes to show that there are plenty of accomplished women in science.

so you arbitrarily decide that some nobel prizes are retarded and meaningless, but others are accurate metrics that demonstrate a high level of skill in somebody relative to other people?

"oh, no, nobel prizes are only a demonstration of accomplishment if it supports my arguments. otherwise they are memes."

Does your point make it weaker? Yes, the nobel prize committee is highly political. Everyone, at least, everyone worth talking to, knows this. It doesn't mean the nobel prize doesn't still have a certain intellectual value attatched to it.

oh, drop the sophistry, please. I think the scientific prizes are a good metric here because the nobel prize in literature and the peace prize are heavily politicized. I'm not saying humanitarian or literary achievements are somehow less valuable in themselves. I admire the achievements of a florence nightingale or virginia woolf. but that's a subjective judgement and boils down to a STEM vs. humanities debate.

>arbitrarily
Do you even know what this means? I clearly started that I awarding dylan and obama prizes in literature and peace, respectively, showed that these prizes are a farce. On the other hand, the nobel prize in the sciences, as far as I know, has been generally awarded fairly. I've taken science, physics and biology classes and you'll always find a section in the text discussing how an exciting breakthrough we take for granted today was "discovered by scientist so-and-so, who got the nobel prize in x field for his/her discovery."

99%? Anyone who was born with it.

Historical figures are the 1%.

>if you have another metric
I'm not sure you do, etc. etc.

Margaret Thatcher

John Elway

>have become memes
They always were. Fucking Teddy "lemme go invade Cuba" Roosevelt has a Nobel Peace Prize.

Not an argument

what you're failing to realize is the entire nobel prize committee is politically motivated, including awards in sciences.

by it's inherent nature it's politically motivated. or else they wouldn't work to announce victors to the world.

who is worth talking to is subjective, what has intellectual value attached to it is subjective. why attempt to use them as indicators of truths?

Teddy didn't start the Spanish-American war even if he was very happy to fight in it. And he got his Nobel for a legitimate reason: brokering peace between Russia and Japan and ending a war. He actually did something and then got the award. Contrast that to Obama who got it just for saying he was going to do things and then never actually accomplished any of them.

This

Grace Hopper
also this

Catherine the Great
Maria Theresa

...

>can his post a female historical figure that clearly have surpassed 99% of males?

In what, lifespan?

Töregene Khatun ruled the Largest country ever in Mongolia when Ogadi Khan died.

maybeh

How much of that country did she conquer?

The first part of what you said was complete exaggeration.

The Virgin Mary. She surpassed all males, in fact, sans Christ himself.

Idk have this

It was the Valois, you complete retard.
The Bourbon came a couple of decades later to power.

>papists really believe she is god.

Wu Zetian

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_Zetian

>Be Chinese pirate queen.
>In terms of manpower, form largest fleet in the world.
>Setup the most strictest pirate code of laws the world has ever known (oddly somewhat progressive ones).
>Do what pirates do for decades until your pirate tribe's collective lewt is thought to be greater than the wealth of all of Asia - most of which is paying taxes to you.
>Dutch challenge you, they get BTFO.
>Portuguese challenge you, they get BTFO.
>British challenge you with the best, most advanced boats, and the most battle-hardened naval fleet the world has to offer.
>They get BTFO.
>Qing dynasty challenges you.
>Of course they get BTFO.
>China surrenders.
>Self and crew retires with full amnesty and keeps all their loot, while you raise a family and run a brothel, living high to the ripe old age of 70.

The only man who can possibly even hold a candle to this woman's balls would be maybe Alexander the Great or some mythical level bullshit. Why there is no movie about this bitch is beyond me.

lol but females didnt even exist before femenism that came in like the 1900's so what exactly is you're question?

I often wonder what history would have been like if Qing hadn't gone full isolationist, essentially scuttled their navy, and instead had become an expansionist world naval power. I mean, this gal wasn't facing these vastly superior naval powers on their home turf, but if she could defeat them so easily with her rag-tag pirate fleet, imagine what a Chinese fleet with full government backing bent on world domination could have done, particularly if it adopted the European naval designs.

Isn't she in one of those Pirates of the Caribbean movies?

Yeah, a brief cameo, but that's about it. It's just strange with all this "women power SJW" bullshit Hollywood loves so much, that there isn't an epic biopic floating around here. Plus, when it comes to diversity, Asians, unlike Blacks, actually are underrepresented in Hollywood.

Then again, I suppose the Chinese government might not approve, and that would be a definite deal killer these days.

History Blockbusters are kind of dead

I suppose the reason is it would be a movie about Asians. Dirty, sweaty, ugly looking pirates on their boats fighting other dirty, sweaty Asian sailors. However the story is epic and the main woman character very interesting, American audiences would have trouble connecting with those people on the screen. That's what the studios are thinking I guess. You could sell this movie in China. Chinese people love epic history movies. But it's a story about China getting BTFO, so good luck eve getting a permission to show it there.

Sun Bu'er gained enlightenment before all her six male classmates - one of whom was her husband Ma Yu, under the tutalge of Wang Chongyang, and it is said that her enlightenment was the most pure out of these seven Taoist masters.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Bu'er

Hildegard von Bingen, largest body of surviving music.

Hypatia and Cleopatra were pretty prolific. Hildegarde of Bingen and Eleanor of Aquitaine were also very prominent.

Catherine the great
Now fuck off

I'm unsure desu the exact. Under mongol law she could continue current operations but could not start new wars. In terms of power though she was as powerful as any man has ever been otherwise.

This game is easy

Interesting whats her name and is there a lot of literature on her?

>jane austen
>good
cmon now

there are plenty of good female writers, but she ain't one

Congrats on failing the pleb test.

desu, Skłodowska was a very controversial pick at the time. Still she and Irene are probably on top 10 when it comes to scientists in history.

Roasties can't compete with men.

I stand my point
>jane austen
>good

This is the shittiest non-argument ever yet I've seen so many retards making it over the years.

>Colin Kaepernick is a mediocre quarterback
>Oh yeah? Are YOU a good quarterback then?

I mean like what's even the point of saying shit like this.

>almost all great men are bad men

Most historical achievements come at the cost of decency and humanity.

Not exactly an historical figure, but Caitlyn Jenner surpassed many men earlier in her life.

Embarrass yourself further by saying who you think is better

To take someone from the same period, I like Mary Shelley

She was English so she was a shit writer by default regardless of gender.