Male lit professor believes in patriarchal oppression and mansplaining

>>male professor points out that men have historically been in positions of power and created institutions to keep themselves in power
As they should have. It is human nature for men to be in power, women weren't made for that.

This what pol actually believes.

Silicon Valley
Hollywood

>Im wrong
Theres a reason power structures have historically leaned towards men in every society on Earth.

Men are made to provide and lead, women have separate but equally important roles.

Deviation from this natural pattern is an entirely new concept, and makes no sense from a historical perspective.

S
S P E R G E D
E
R
G
E
D

The reason wasn't because it was the best policy, if they let woman rule and learn and achieve we would have more than we do today.

Human beings have equal brains, seperate but equal is you wanting women in the kitchen and pretending that you think it's important for "kindness" points.

From a historical prospective, the way we treat disease, bathe, eat, fix people, solve arguments, make money, travel, learn, write, build, and live makes no sense.

>The reason wasn't because it was the best policy
There was no real reason, men being more physically powerful and mentally capable took the reins and led societies. It happened naturally.
>if they let woman rule and learn and achieve we would have more than we do today.
Sauce
>Human beings have equal brains
No they dont lmao. Men's and women's brains are wired differently, this is widely accepted and has been proven time and time again. Different races also have slight differences in their brains, races that had to adapt to survive in cold climates developed a higher capacity for critical thinking, for example.

Do you honestly believe women and men are completely interchangeable? That there's nothing special about a woman, no maternal instinct that makes her a better caretaker?

>From a historical prospective, the way we treat disease, bathe, eat, fix people, solve arguments, make money, travel, learn, write, build, and live makes no sense.
Those are technological advances, not social structures.

>S
>S P E R G E D
>E
>R
>G
>E
>D
what did he mean by this?

He meant "I'm from reddit".

If he's not being ironic this board has sunk to new depths.

>Le take the redpill tier response.
>Men are more mentally capable
>Sauce
Wu Zetian, Elizabeth, Boudica, Dido, Cleopatra, Eleanor Roosevelt, Joan of Arc, Madam Curie, Harriet Tubman, Virginia Woolf, Catherine, Jane Goodall, Margaret Thatcher, etc.
>Colder climates had to adapt
Why does China outdo America and Europe academically? Why do women and men both know how to take care of a child, how come both can be scientists and engineers and so on?

>Wu Zetian, Elizabeth, Boudica, Dido, Cleopatra, Eleanor Roosevelt, Joan of Arc, Madam Curie, Harriet Tubman, Virginia Woolf, Catherine, Jane Goodall, Margaret Thatcher, etc.
Nobody denies that there have been important historical figures who have been women.

Now let's list all the important historical figures who were men. Might need to upgrade Veeky Forums's server space before doing that though.

>Why does China outdo America and Europe academically?
First off, China has a cold climate, so I'm not really getting your point. Secondly, American scores are depressed by its non-white, non-asian population. If you separate american scores by race american asians are #1 in the world, and american whites are like #2 for whites, just behind finland.

this is the most autistic, reddit-tier leftist braindead post I've seen on here

how did this shitstain find this place?

>anecdotes as an argumentative source

just suicide already

>Why do women and men both know how to take care of a child
Because taking care of a child isnt rocket science.

But can a man breast feed a child though? Are men, in general, as nurturing and understanding as women?

He probably saw that meme list "Top 100 books according to Veeky Forums" on r/books and decided to stroll on over.

>Why does China outdo America and Europe academically?
Yeah, you're right. I forgot how close to the equator China was. Guess ill pack my bags, you won this one.

>Wu Zetian, Elizabeth, Boudica, Dido, Cleopatra, Eleanor Roosevelt, Joan of Arc, Madam Curie, Harriet Tubman, Virginia Woolf, Catherine, Jane Goodall, Margaret Thatcher, etc.

Most of these aren't even leaders, they're just historical figures. Last I checked you were talking about power structures not general fame.

Nobody denies that there have been important historical figures who have been men.

Now, how could an absolutely inferior gender achieve anything at all?

>China cold climate
China is not a cold climate. There is cold in China, but it's not always cold.

>Blames the niggers and jews

Surprise surprise. Let me ask again, why does china surpass AMERICA AND EUROPE ACADEMICALLY.

>Redditor decides to argue off of /b/ for once, un aware that on /b/ he was arguing with teenagers.

>Now, how could an absolutely inferior gender achieve anything at all?
Because statistical outliers exist? Just because women are on average less fit to be leaders than men doesn't mean that there aren't any leaders to be found within the ranks of women.

Since you seem to be a moron, let me propose an easy analogy: just because japanese people are shorter than dutch people on average doesn't mean that there aren't some very tall japanese people.

>China is not a cold climate
At this point you're just denying reality.

>Blames the niggers and jews
I didn't even mention the Jews. Anyways I wouldn't mention them since they probably score way higher than average on academic tests.

>Let me ask again, why does china surpass AMERICA AND EUROPE ACADEMICALLY.
Okay you must trolling.

This is lit, not pol. We can have opinions that aren't redpilled faggotry here.
Anecdotes? What?
Depends on what edgy pol faggot you ask. Dome say women are heartless. How come women can do rocket science if they are inferior?
Lol. >China's cold all the time and that made them smart!
4. 4 aren't leaders. How come your superior man brain couldn't count?

>China is not a cold climate. There is cold in China, but it's not always cold.
I wasn't sure it was possible to be this retarded.

Do you think its always cold in all of Europe?

Northeast Asians and Europeans evolved similarly in cold climates where their brains had to develop better problem solving and critical thinking skills to help them not fucking die. This is in contrast with Africans and Australians (who by the way have an average IQ of around 65) who never needed to develop such skills, which explains why they generally fail in western countries these days.

>Delving into the mind of an anti-intellectual redditor
Truly an eye-opening experience

>I think I'm right so I'm fucking right! I'll start to sound condescending and stacy will start to respect me.

Fuck you.
These women aren't somehow not women because they were leaders. They arent outliers, we have seen that woman are effective in business and leadership around the world. I know that they don't agree with you politically and you think that makes them shit, but that's your opinion.

The only real data you have behind gender intellect is the bell curve, which places women at near average, and men on the lower and higher of the scale.
>China is a cold climate and it's just cold and its always cold all of it and everyone in China who has ever done anything lived where it was cold because it was cold.
>I wouldn't mention them because I'm trying to win this internet discussion
Pathetic.
>Ur trolling kek

>China's cold all the time and that made them smart!

More like Northeast Asian people had their ethnogenesis in one of the coldest climates inhabited by humans, and as a result of that evolved as smarter than most other humans.

Can you see the difference between my statement and what you perceive it to be?

Most people can accept different races have different averaging heights, black people tend to be tall asian's tend to be short. Now consider what makes people different, genes. If there are different averaging heights logic would have it that there are different averaging intelligences for the different races.

I don't recall anyone saying anything about intellect, all he said was leadership qualities. Intellect isn't the only thing that goes into leadership. I am only now starting to realize just how strong the hive mind can be against logic.

ITT half of Veeky Forums gets baited by a retard.

You should be ashamed.

It became pretty obvious the guy was trolling after this post

>Fuck you.
Okay

>These women aren't somehow not women because they were leaders.
You seem to be suffering from hallucinations, because I never said that these women were "not women", whatever that means.

> They arent outliers
They are, by virtue of the fact that they are a very small number.

>we have seen that woman are effective in business and leadership around the world.
How the hell do you quantify "effectiveness"? How many tech startups are founded by women? I think that would be an interesting statistic.

> I know that they don't agree with you politically
I'm sure Maggie Thatcher would agree with me politically.

> and you think that makes them shit
To be honest, I've never seen someone strawmanning THIS hard.

>The only real data you have behind gender intellect is the bell curve, which places women at near average, and men on the lower and higher of the scale.
I was thinking more about personality traits rather than intelligence. If you think than intelligent women tend to choose more "human contact" careers like doctor or lawyer as compared to, say, software engineer, because of "societal constructs", then you're a huge moron, sorry to say.

Also you seem really hung up on the china thing. Beijing's annual temperatures.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing#Climate

This has got to be an elaborate false flag attack. I've seen people argue leftist or feminist ideas here before but they weren't nearly this embarrassing.

b8 as fuck.

>men have historically been in positions of power and created institutions to keep themselves in power

Why didn't women create those institutions that would allow them to rule over men first?

The vast majority of political, military, and business leaders are men.

Have you ever thought that, maybe, you know, it's because women don't want those roles? I don't really blame them desu.

Because historically women didn't have the social status that would have allowed them to create institutions?

Areally American colleges just a meme?

Unless its name is Stanford, Harvard, MIT, or Yale, American colleges are among the worst in the developed world.

why not?

How did men achieve the social status that allowed them to create those institutions?

>Unless its name is Stanford, Harvard, MIT, or Yale, American colleges are among the worst in the developed world.
Uh, yeah, no

Id like a source on that you meme spouting fuck

American colleges are top tier

Only those colleges are. Every other college is a scam. People with tenure teach two minimum effort classes and get a shitload of money while up-and-coming intellectuals are shuffled around all over the country because they get kicked out the second they might get tenure. And, of course, the education itself suffers from this, so schools end up hiring idiots to fill slots because they can underpay them.

The only functional purpose of non-Ivy schools in the U.S.A. is to make contacts. You will be more successful if you barely graduate while being a fraternity bro than if you put everything into academics and top your class.

You severely underestimate just how many smart people occupy positions at even America's shittiest colleges. Nobody wants to teach in mainland Europe or X backward country because they're uniformly insular shitholes - what thinking person ever said "I can earn a lot of prestige and money by learning X language in my free time (which I don't have) and teaching in Berlin/Rome/Milan/Madrid/Tokyo/Shanghai"? Nobody of note, that's who. Meanwhile, anyone from any country can come to the US and be happy there because it's the objectively superior nation, with superior living standards, quality of life, and intellectual vigor. The only universities that even come close to the US are Cambridge and the Sorbonne, and these are about as calcified as coral reefs.

The Sorbonne is shit, you must be thinking of some other school

t. frenchfag

Because they were almost uniformly excluded from the activities that would allow them to acquire social status?

How?

>I'm a fucking retard who can't do my own research
t. you

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primogeniture

It's not easy to do things like have personal autonomy when you're literally excluded from inheriting property for 3,000+ years.

How did primogeniture get established?

>The only functional purpose of non-Ivy schools in the U.S.A. is to make contacts

You've got that backwards. Harvard, Yale, etc, are country clubs. You go there to network with other rich people. I was reading about some rich Jew and he founded his company with some other rich Jews he met at Harvard, where his rich Jew father the donor and philanthropist had went. . . you get the idea. Same story with Zuckerberg. What magical things are you going to learn in lectures at Harvard that you couldn't learn somewhere cheaper? If you feel that strongly about the instructors teaching in the Ivy League you could just buy their books for a pittance on amazon.

I don't know, how is it that males commit the overwhelming majority of rapes in all societies past and present?

Must be innate.

Sometimes Veeky Forums is alright

>I don't know

>I don't know

>must be innate

He was agreeing with you. Meme about that instead.

Something makes me doubt that was a "he", friend.
Well maybe a numale cuck?

Men created institutions to keep themselves in power. Women were unable to because they didn't have social status. Women were unable to obtain social status because of institutions, such as Primogeniture.

This is your argument?

>today
the benefits of those institutions haven't just evaporated overnight, even if the institutions themselves have.

At some point in the past women probably did have institutions of power. They just predate the neolithic revolution.

Don't worry though, we're sailing headlong back into that territory.

Fucking lmao read some evolutionary biology

>Human beings have equal brains

Except they don't, at all. There's observable differences in size, connectivity, as well as IQ.

It's pretty hard to force a male to have sex with you if you don't have a dick. The majority of rape victims in the United States are male. . .but they're getting assraped by other prison inmates. What can I say, I'm just a natural raping machine.

>there are people who genuinely believes the OP isn't just here to have another /pol/ thread on Veeky Forums
>there are people who know this and still get so outraged at the notion of patriarchy that they still contribute