Are these true?

Finally my hate towards women is duly justified!

biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/04/04/123729

So many flaws I can't even...
>Appeal to definition
This isn't how you classify humans scientifically. Argument completely rest on making your own re-definition

>wrong history
Women rights didn't allow them to do much actually, they haven't been pampered and privileged until recently. It's more correct to say that they are taking more rights than the ones we were keeping from them

>Even today...
>hardly ever composed noteworthy songs
Both are false.
Independent female workers exist and female musical artists are pretty famous and indeed noteworthy

And? Not all women are sluts. Nothing to refute, just to understand but not care about it.

>bs without a single evidence
Prove it. I don't have to refute a theory without a single shred of evedense.

Now kindly fuck off back to /r9k/

>Now kindly fuck off back to /r9k/
Get out of Veeky Forums roastie.

>no rebuttal after asking for an argument

Trust me, it's more fitting for you

>not all women are sluts
Hahahaha

What N is? The sample size?
Wow, max of 4k... such a conclusive proof!

Also are those result counting the future husband as premarital sex partner?

You would think all of this logic and reason would make females fuck off but they really cant leave men alone at all.

>logic and reason
I don't have to add any comment to make you look like a fool, but since I am typing...

lol.

>synaptic density in temporal neocortex
What about the rest?

If you want to read more on sex differences in intelligence you can look into Helmuth Nyborg's papers.

Also, check out HBDchick for more on HBD:
hbdchick.wordpress.com/

Shills are attacking low-pop boards to stop people countering the equality/egalitarian narrative. And yeah, that picture is real, it's largely got to do with different organ sizes in male and females, and in general, a bigger brain is correlated with a higher intelligence.

Don't go full autistic MGTOW though, women are just very different from men - in the same way other ethnic groups might be less intelligent and more aggressive than Europeans but individuals within those groups might be great people. HBDchick writes about sex differences fairly frankly, so just use the 'site:' function to filter it to sex if you want.

Enjoy, HBD is a wild ride.

Here's some more general HBD pictures

...

Go away please, all you women do is shit up any forum.

Here's another interesting one

...

...

>there is no difference between Islam, with interpretations leaning on literally "kill infidels" and a religion that is all about "reaching internal peace"

i can't find this occurring in species other than a species of fly
by this i mean telogony
it is well known men have better spatial awareness and women have better verbal

IQ is generally about the same for men and women of the same population
women from an asian population will obviously have a higher iq than males in some other population, but that's beside the point

A lot of times they can't help it, they have a stronger emotional reaction to things they don't like because of higher estrogen levels: medicaldaily.com/study-womens-brains-are-more-sensitive-negative-emotions-react-differently-mens-354226

Not a bad thing though, look at women with someone who is dying compared to how fumbling a man is in that situation (read War and Peace for a nice example of this).

>it is well known men have better spatial awareness and women have better verbal
By well known, you mean common pop-science platitude.

I do disagree with them on this, I assume they haven't studied the Koran and the Hadit.
Nonetheless, there seems to be variance in which ME ethnic groups are commiting terroristic acts so there may be some merit to there ideas:
unz.com/jman/terrorism-quotient/

> this whole thread

My fucking sides. Jesus.

gwas point to a much lower figure
heritability depends on environment
by the way, twin studies can't account for intrauterine effects
>le muslins are inbred and so they dum
1. people from the same population are about as similar as cousins
2. that shit gets cleared in a generation
3. muslims drink lead water and live in suboptimal conditions
4. race matters, so think about that
5. google 'iceland inbred'

i won't mention history and what we can learn from it

>muh hbd though
this isn't the first bs i see born there, and it probably won't be the last

Wow, you really told him
Here's an interesting study exemplifying that 'pop-science platitude'
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4766283/

call it whatever you like
where's the study on telegony in humans

you won't find it
why?

because all it takes is to read how babies are made

I haven't as well. That's common knowledge
And once again, Islam indeed ISN'T a religion of violence, but some interpretations are used as such.
I agree that Islam isn't the cause of terrorism though, but surely it's more likely they have their interests than "Genetic Tendencies"

Yeah, indeed

I think you responded to the wrong post

no
muslims are crazy

white people are more altruistic and have the altrustic GENE

it's genetic

Of course.

No need to strawman the opposition, they already proved how retarded they are enough with that comparison between Islam and Buddhism

More very petty nit-picking (as usual environment arguments are)

>1. people from the same population are about as similar as cousins
Actually they're much more different (though there is a large amount of inbreeding between 4th-5th cousins and so on in Europe, which leaves 'Europeans', and mainly central and Northern Europeans, less clannish - so there's more out-group altruism).
Much of the HBD crowd try to dismiss ethnic group-interests though because they insist that Hamilton's law only applies to closer relatives such as first cousins. (something we both seem to disagree with)

>i won't mention history and what we can learn from it
You just seem to be bitching and moaning, I don't know what exactly your problem with what I posted is, there's countless other papers corroborating this stuffh kek. And by the way, they are just generic studies to pique interest since I'm not on my desktop with more interesting stuff

...

yes

I read them after a pretty smart second generation 'Muslim in name only' friend mentioned them to me. My observation is like Toynbee's 'Islam was unleashed upon the world as the faith of a barbarian warband'.

However, a lot of Muslims are like a lot of Christians now. For example, they say that they don't mind gay marriage despite their bible being against it. I don't mind that though, they equate believing in god with being a good person, so more power to them I guess. Not a lot of them read the Bible or Koran, though the Koran is incredibly violent and aggressive compared to the NT in particular.

niggas never heard of the buddhists committing genocide against muslims in south-east asia?

steve jobs was a buddhist.
It's a religion of peace

'white people' is an American idea, an Irishman is very different from an Italian or a German for example. They are just more closely related than they would be to an Asian or African for example.

Also, what's that rule about discussions mentioning Hitler after a certain point?

Yeah, another interesting phenomenon though I've never looked into the reasons behind it

They're living with muslims is why.

I think the HBD people don't know any better, people tend to believe by default that 'all religions are the same', 'we all believe in the same thing basically'. Could be what they are falling for there.

I dont care make them away please fucking christ they shit up every Veeky Forums board.

Since another user tried to sow dissent by mentioning the altruism argument in relation to ebil nadziss:DDDD

Here's a nice intro to the idea of out-group altrusim being genetic:
hbdchick.wordpress.com/2016/03/02/viscous-populations-and-the-selection-for-altruistic-behaviors/
hbdchick.wordpress.com/2014/03/10/big-summary-post-on-the-hajnal-line/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kin_selection
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_D._Putnam#Diversity_and_trust_within_communities (very interesting in relation to the above)

hmm

i ought to have gotten you thinking by now

I know that's true, but I recently got married to a top-tier woman and so I'm a little blind when it comes to recognising faults as faults rather than some hidden virtue.

Just don't go full MGTOW, that community is cancerous; good women are out there if you aren't in a shitty country/community. Just acknowledge the facts and don't dwell on how things may or may not be against you. Just saying, because /r9k/ is an example of what that leads to. (though that's recent, r9k used to just be people writing sucide letters to one another kek)

MGTOW is just men sick of the system entirely, you work your entire life and she sucks another man's cock who did nothing at all. Until we can violently abuse our women when they whore on us MGTOW will always be a thing.

you ignored the majority of what i said

>even in 2010s the largest probability is 1 partner
Sluts!

And who gives a shit? Men are sluts too. Are you Christian or something?

It's extremely interesting, I started studying race years ago (before it became SUPER touchy) after seeing a picture of an albino African and wondering why he looked so dramatically different. Really worth reading into if you guys are just casually interested in the topic.

>MGTOW

Literally "feel sorry for me because I'm an inferior male". Fucking lol. It's for the good of the species that the MGTOW crowd don't breed.

I understand that, but I guess my community is just very different from the politicised and propaganidised relations between sexes in the US and most of Europe.

I live in a fairly rural community where there is a very strong group morality which is fundamentally non-religious despite some people here attending church. I mean, people don't sleep around, there's zero crime and so on. People are just good-hearted and have a default dislike of authority (and therefore, the media and politics too).

The US population is super politicised and the media promote degenerate/decadent behaviour which is then exported to the rest of Western Europe. It's interesting to see the urban/rural distinction in behaviour. I think over-exposure to people you don't have any sort of relationships with screws with people (think of always-smiling business people for example, they just unnerve me.)

Who wrote this dreck and how do they explain rich women being sugar mommies? Denial and ear-covering?

>Who wrote this dreck and how do they explain rich women being sugar mommies? Denial and ear-covering?

Or lesbians? If both women want to marry above their station, at least one of them is settling.

Y'all need to get laid instead of writing these untestable hypoteses.

Promiscuity is a sign of moral-decline and if it becomens widespread in a population, civic-decline.

Surprisingly the most successful woman I know has only had one sexual partner who she's been with for 7 years now. She's also the smartest. Same thing with my wife. A lot of sex just seems to mess with people. (I know, muh anecdotes, but it's interesting to see that the opposite extreme - 'sluts' - tend to be unsuccessful people)

Does anyone have that infographic with all the studies on promiscuity and its correlation with depression, reported quality of life, substance abuse and so on?

I expect it's due to over-stimulation or something like that (maybe it puts oxytocin out of whack?), hopefully some studies will be done on it soon. The same goes for men by the way, though their sex-drive is much higher.

>inferior
Most divorced men have breeded more than once though.

Also I believe you are a woman because of how callous your thoughts are towards divorced men.

It is known that women are evolved to depend on a man for resources - things like lower ambition, and the high likelihood to drop out of the workforce to raise children (I know one woman who worked until her kids were 5 until her husband made enough to provide for the whole family) are manifestations for this evolutionary development. Lesbians and homosexuality in general being an interesting aberration that nobody can explain just yet.

But the picture is stupid, it doesn't consider things like the need for 'companionate love' that most normal people need more than sexual pleasure.

*or status

>Most divorced men have breeded more than once though
That's what they think lmao.

>Also I believe you are a woman
Then you'd be wrong. I just don't have any time for the whaling of evolutions dead ends.

Are you stupid? 4k is more than decent

1000 women having premarital sex doesn't imply 1000 men are lmfao

This comment is cringe af

Godwin's Law

>Promiscuity is a sign of moral-decline and if it becomens widespread in a population, civic-decline.
No, it's a sign of non-repressed sexual freedom. It's human nature to want to fuck stuff.

>anecdote
I'm ignoring your anecdote.

>Does anyone have that infographic with all the studies on promiscuity and its correlation with depression, reported quality of life, substance abuse and so on?
This is obvious due to mental illness and self-esteem issues. One does not necessarily imply the other.
>I expect it's due to over-stimulation or something like that (maybe it puts oxytocin out of whack?), hopefully some studies will be done on it soon.
I shiggy diggy you don't believe that. Plenty of successful people are on cocaine and stuff.
>The same goes for men by the way, though their sex-drive is much higher.
False.

Why am I even arguing in a troll thread?

Does having a lot of sex really ruin your ability for pair bonding?

Is Humanity subhumanising ?

Probably the opposite (up until a certain point). If my wife had been my first, I would probably be full of regret.

>If my wife had been my first, I would probably be full of regret.
I'm the opposite. I lost my virginity to someone who's not my wife and regret it.

>Who wrote this dreck and how do they explain rich women being sugar mommies
Are you asking why exceptions are exceptions?

Imo who cares who you popped your cherry on? This virginity thing is so overblown. Like it's some sacred ritual or something. Were you your wife's first or something?

Oh look, its the classic /pol/tard "flood a thread with poorly sourced .jpegs so no-one can debunk any of them in time".

People here are insulting /r9k/ by assuming they resort to this time-honoured /pol/tard tactic.

>non-repressed sexual freedom
Back to Degeneddit hedonist

I know right

Not at all to make such a conclusion

No women cannot pair bond period, they can only DICK BOND.

The last reference, "Total Number of Synapses in the Adult Human Neocortex" returns not hits on PubMed. I was able to find the first one and verify it. I need to get back to work. If anyone can find the last reference or the middle one I'd appreciate it.

Yes but every single study in the OP said the point of these results was how despite these physiological differences men and women scored the same on cognitive tests therefore they don't seem to make a difference.

In other words it's misrepresented statistics.

Selective testing. I didn't bother to read each study but I'm assuming they didn't have a female clone of a male participant.

Sample sizes are vastly unequal. The first and last two are not nearly as representative as the samples in the middle. Should have aimed for n=1000 and also, is the husband included in the sex partner or column? I'm assuming so. Also to solidify your point, you would need a representative study for males in the same decades which, I promise you, would yield very very different results.