Sure, why not. Women are perfectly fine. Feminists are not. Both male and female. Actually, male feminists are probably even more insufferable than the female ones.
Women in science can apply for funding through the normal channels AND through NGOs like the National Women's Council. This gives them twice as much opportunity for funding than men, making it an unfair playing field (or if it isn't unfair, then we are basically admitting that women can't compete without special treatment). I think women should be allowed in science (or simply that they should not be disallowed just because they are women), but the special treatment should be removed, or the fact that they aren't able to compete should be admitted publically and women should become wards of the state and go back into the kitchen, where the majority ultimately belong.
No. Intelligent people do. If they can ask questions, run experiments, not lie, and solve problems then they should be in science. Be it men, women, trannies, homosexuals, OP. It just so happens 97% will be men, 1.9% will be women, .1% will be trannies.
Women may optionally entertain careers after the age of 45. After bearing 3 children at a minimum and raising them to adulthood she may do with her life as she chooses.
as long as they aren't professors
if a woman has to teach something it's actually better to have her teach science and math (undergraduate or lower) than the humanities
I dont hate or dislike women.
Women in the workplace however (including science) has been extremely deliterious.
It's ok, the west will go Korea mode or there'll be some sort of male uprising. It will have to be against the govt because the govt (poweful males) arent harmed by womrn getting ahead. Indeed, women are good obedient workers who dont cause disruption in the same way motivated men do. They dont ask for wage rises, theyrr financially illiterate, and so on.
None of that I really blame them for. They're just different. But *much* easier to rule over than a powerful male workforce. If men have no resources save for the elites, they cannot possibly upset the status quo. Women have too much self preservation to ever violently protest a controlling authoritarian state.
You must see the "women in STEM" as creating a moat around the powerful from disgruntled men.
some of them, sure. I've been involved in science in academia and private industry. women are just as good at men at number crunching and paper writing.
although i think in general men are slightly better at experimental design. although i don't have good data to back that up.
The sciences are inherently a feminine activity
, because they mostly consist of low-consequence accounting work, lab work (or equivalents in fields beside bio/chem), and needing a high verbal IQ to author a paper that gains some traction, not to mention the networking required in pursuit of the same goal.
Sure, why not. Women are perfectly fine. Feminists are not. Both male and female. Actually, male feminists are probably even more insufferable than the female ones.
Relax Thunderf00t.
The fact you can't get laid has nothing to do with feminism.
please does someone have this troon leftist wojack parody image of thunderf00t?
the one where he shows the middle finger
trvth nvke
There are some good eggs, yes.
There is a very specific type of woman that belongs to science. Most women are not of that type.
Women in science can apply for funding through the normal channels AND through NGOs like the National Women's Council. This gives them twice as much opportunity for funding than men, making it an unfair playing field (or if it isn't unfair, then we are basically admitting that women can't compete without special treatment). I think women should be allowed in science (or simply that they should not be disallowed just because they are women), but the special treatment should be removed, or the fact that they aren't able to compete should be admitted publically and women should become wards of the state and go back into the kitchen, where the majority ultimately belong.
Women belong on science.
(Science is what I named my penis.)
not big on science eh?
No. Intelligent people do. If they can ask questions, run experiments, not lie, and solve problems then they should be in science. Be it men, women, trannies, homosexuals, OP. It just so happens 97% will be men, 1.9% will be women, .1% will be trannies.
As long as they give me the sex they owe me, they can do science.
Women may optionally entertain careers after the age of 45. After bearing 3 children at a minimum and raising them to adulthood she may do with her life as she chooses.
I'd let women this hot in, sure.
The halo effect alone is worth like 35 IQ points.
>t. incel
>Implying that's a bad thing
Women are trash, I wish I was a homosexual.
Yes.
A woman's place is in the kitchen.
Sure, but only if they're hot. Hot babe scientists is my fetish.
as long as they aren't professors
if a woman has to teach something it's actually better to have her teach science and math (undergraduate or lower) than the humanities
More Dianne Fosseys, fewer Jane Goodalls
nvm I found it
immagine his face when he wakes to a phonecall from some russian doctors explaining him that his entire familly fell out of a window
No. They should stop taking spots from men and raise new scientists instead.
>Sounds like the average crystal healing astrology toting misandrist
>Womem bab
Lmao
Based beyond belief.
>Samegay jerks own ego
Based, behead all women
Butthurt child angry that people disagree with him on shit that doesn't matter
>Samegay returns, still insecure about women being more valuable to society than he ever has been
>Butthurt moron angry that he will die a virgin can't do anything to contribute to society, doesn't raise his life well never matter
>Am mobilegay
Realise* frick
Ad hominem bros...
I dont hate or dislike women.
Women in the workplace however (including science) has been extremely deliterious.
It's ok, the west will go Korea mode or there'll be some sort of male uprising. It will have to be against the govt because the govt (poweful males) arent harmed by womrn getting ahead. Indeed, women are good obedient workers who dont cause disruption in the same way motivated men do. They dont ask for wage rises, theyrr financially illiterate, and so on.
None of that I really blame them for. They're just different. But *much* easier to rule over than a powerful male workforce. If men have no resources save for the elites, they cannot possibly upset the status quo. Women have too much self preservation to ever violently protest a controlling authoritarian state.
You must see the "women in STEM" as creating a moat around the powerful from disgruntled men.
some of them, sure. I've been involved in science in academia and private industry. women are just as good at men at number crunching and paper writing.
although i think in general men are slightly better at experimental design. although i don't have good data to back that up.
The sciences are inherently a feminine activity
, because they mostly consist of low-consequence accounting work, lab work (or equivalents in fields beside bio/chem), and needing a high verbal IQ to author a paper that gains some traction, not to mention the networking required in pursuit of the same goal.