Why are women so small and weak? I mean shouldnt the sex which is taking care of the infants and is crucial for their development also be the stronger one?
>>7701028
I don't know why exactly, but males being larger suggests that in the wild males would have multiple females.
I guess it's just something that happens in nature.
>>7701028
It's not like that in all species. Female spiders are stronger etc.
>>7701037
Are you not aware of literally every other mammal? Did you never watch Lion King when you were are kid?
>>7701028
Actually, women are much less prone to diseases and overall live longer than men. Muscle strength doesn't matter when you are raising babies.
>>7701045
That's another issue I have with the adaptationism of our species.
They live 40+ years once they've already already lost fertility. So they will live a minimum of 20 years where they the weakest and stupidest members of the tribe just placing a burden on the younger generation.
Why don't they die younger?
>>7701052
Grandparents watching young children in cave/hut while dad is out hunting and mom is out gathering. More overall good gathered, and children (and older females) are protected from predation.
>>7701056
>Grandparents watching young children in cave/hut while dad is out hunting and mom is out gathering. More overall good gathered, and children (and older females) are protected from predation.
Wouldn't male grandparents be more efficient in protecting the cave/hut?
>>7701058
Yes, but men are more likely to die young (through injury and disease as been mentioned), so there are fewer of them around.
>>7701042
female lions are the ones that do the hunting in real life
>>7701058
yes but whos going to protect the child from the grandfathers sexual urges?
>>7701028
Since we've gotten off topic, to answer ops question
>why are females small and weak
Child bearing is a huge metabolic commitment of resources which males never have to make. This allows makes to invest their metabolism into building and maintaining larger muscles by body weight. This is mostly true among mammals and birds, warm blooded creatures who have to maintain a body temperature, less so for other species, but atill mostly true anyway. Only a very small number of species have it the other way around, Hyenas for example, for the most part the rule is same size or males larger. It all comes down to metabolic costs of reproduction.
>>7701066
No shit, it's nice that you know that little factoid, but male lions are still stronger.
>>7701058
Once you actually have huts, small villages, men too old to hunt can spend most of the day maintaining the village, fixing leaks in roofs, and can teach older, but still to young to hunt, say 4 to 12 year old boys these tasks as well as basic skills like making tools. It's your basic division of labor, grandmothers take care of the youngest newborns to maybe 5 year olds, grandfathers teach older children skills and maintain the village.
>>7701037
I'm the one you responded to. Can you give some examples, or suggest somethings for me to read to back this up? It just contradicts what I've read.
Off the top of my head, both lions and gorillas follow the scheme I suggested, but I can't remember exactly where I read this before.
>>7701028
because males are more fed by the patriarchy
>>7701132
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism
>Wikipedia
Read the sources
>>7701037
>smarter
Proof?
>>7701218
It's an empirical study authored by me.
>>7701028
Maintaining muscle trophism takes a large amount of energy and nutrients. That significantly raises your maintenance caloric expenditure. Add that to bleeding once per month, women would need to eat far more. Just imagine having to grow another being inside of you as well.
Division of tasks is what made humans more successful, mainly in the "ice age". Women historically weren't just laying around doing nothing and or getting fucked all day either, they took care of tasks that didn't require as much strength. Etc. That's also why fat distribution is different. Though one thing I'm not certain of, is why the ability to think mechanically is so underexpressed in women. Their blood brain barrier inhibits estrogen crossing, but males do not. And estrogen seems to have a great effect on visuospatial processing. It could have to do with rapid threat detection and response. It can't really be argued that women are more feelings oriented, this comprises more of their chain of logic. Could have something to do with caring for young and mate selection, I don't know. Maybe it rose out of being weaker to begin with.
Evolution doesn't care. Things can just happen, and if he weren't within the ecology they exist, then that's just how it is. There have been exceptions to this general evolutionary strategy. The Amazons might have been one of these.
>>7701218
Open literally any history book.
>>7701072
Only good answer in this thread. Exactly what OP was looking for.
>>7701360
>woman carrying a much shorter log on her shoulder
>men carrying a much bigger log overhead with their arms, for long distances
>HURR WOMYN STRONG
>>7701392
>being this mad
>>7701392
You actually can't tell from the picture that the long carried by the men is any longer than the one the women is carrying.
Besides, regardless of length, the men seem to have more people RELATIVE to the length of the log than in the woman's case. Note that the woman's log extends in front and behind of her, while the men's log doesn't extend in front of the first man, and presumably doesn't extent behind the last man either. And since weight is presumably proportional to length, even if the log carried by the men IS longer, each man is carrying less weight than the woman is.
>>7701401
They're carrying it overhead while marching.
Go ahead and carry just 45 pounds directly above your head for 30 minutes. Guarantee you don't make it.
Ok another /x/er /pol/ack thinking they've discovered something science hasn't in the history of man.
Confirmed snowflake
>>7701332
That doesnt proof shit
>>7701396
Lmao
![latest[2].png](https://i.imgur.com/0SBMYUf.png "latest[2].png")
>>7701028
We come from apes. Most mammals have an instinctive role in their family where the female takes care of the home and male goes out hunting. This caused humanity to take a path where the male had to be strong and agile where females didn't. Which led further for men in our society to take jobs and tasks that required physical strength.
You can clearly see this in the animal kingdom as well.
>>7701332
Lol you'd make a terrible scientist. Also at this point in time, in the western world women are more educated than men as per person they hold higher or more tertiary degrees. Doesnt mean they a smarter than men, but by your logic they would be.
Lrn 2 critical think.
>>7703069
This also shaped the publics perception where strong males are preferred in the society.
>>7703069
What about lions? Female do the dirty work there
>>7703139
I think with lions both parents hunt. I'm not sure if its sex related or they just like to hunt stuff because they're big cats.
>>7703139
Hunting smaller mammals is not difficult for lions. Defending the territory against other prides is difficult, which is why the male lion saves his energy for battles that matter.
>>7703154
But lions also hunt gnus and they arent smaller mammals
>>7703188
Male lions help when needed to hunt larger prey.
>>7701028
Actually womyn are naturally stronger than men, they are merely socialised into avoiding developing their strength for fear of being "unwomanly".
>>7703074
He is not pointing out anything related to number of degrees, rather, he is pointing how men basically did everything before some point. It is fair to argue that males took leadership roles because they were more capable. How it relates to intelligence is something else.
>>7701332
History books are a record of men's failures
>>7703382
Litteraly false for all history books before 1980
>>7703363
>It is fair to argue that males took leadership roles because they were more capable
You could also argue that men used their physical strength to impose a social order in which women would not be allowed the freedom to participate in politics, science, etc. therefore guaranteeing that men would "do everything"
>>7703385
Thinks throwing the word "literally" in there is the equivalent of making an argument
>>7703385
Right because everything that happened before 1980 was such a success
>>7703403
There's nothing complex about "I'll beat the shit out of you if you don't stay in your place"
It's actually quite primitive.
>>7703407
It records everything. I don't get your point.
>>7703403
I've read dozens of history books - there is, on the balance, more death, destruction, social inequality, and suffering than anything else - you don't call this failure?
>>7703415
But it is quite primitive to think that was how societies worked back back in the day.
>>7703421
It's how society has worked until recently, dumbass.
>>7703423
Clearly there were gender roles but it was basically the norm and the way we related socially. You are just stating that it was a systematic oppression that must have lasted 5000 years. Even today in places such as Finland or Sweden you can see this patterns arise again with people fulfilling gender roles.
Fuck off to tmblr
>>7703435
>You are just stating that it was a systematic oppression that must have lasted 5000 years
Pretty much, Champ. Prove me wrong.
>>7701362
Yup. Fucking Lion King was brought up at one point.
>>7703423
Historyfag here.
No its not.
Literally kill yourself, faggot.
>>7703458
>Historyfag here.
>No its not.
Ooooooh. You got me!
>>7703463
Its not really a claim that warrants discussion or refutation. Its like flat earth or perpetual motion.
>>7703470
Right...tell me about when women got the right to vote, to participate in politics, to attend universities, to own and manage property, to hold their own bank accounts, to - you fucking child.
>>7703479
That is a gross oversimplification given that most of what you mentioned is mostly modern inventions. Basically you could reduce that men who were not of nobility also sufferd from this. If you think aristocratic women were oppressed you are delusional.
>>7703491
Women had no political agency in the Roman Empire either.
>>7703491
Obviously compared to men who weren't of noble birth, aristocratic women weren't oppressed, but within each social strata, women always had less agency than men. In the educated classes, women were not allowed to receive the education that might have allowed them to contribute - even when they obviously had it better than a male slave or field worker.
>>7703501
Neither slaves or poor men. The rise of women's rights movement began when the middle class arose and the popularization of blue collar jobs.
>>7703501
Nor did anyone else you moron. And if you think the wife of the Emperor lacked influence then you are simply deluded.
There is an old adage that runs, "Men control everything in the world. What do women control? Men." You don't need (or even necessarily WANT) agency if you can direct other agents, this has been the traditional female strategy throughout time. All that's changed since the 1900's is that women now ALSO have the political power, without giving up a single bit of their traditional control over men.
>>7703513
Yes, but women of the social strata where men had political agency did not have it, did they?
>>7703518
Men must not be that smart, then, if women are really in control of everything.
Do women control you? What kind of pussy are you?
>>7703520
Who gives a fuck if you are stuffing your face with hony roasted ham and fucking big cock all day? Also women had important influence on men and were important for political roles. They were not perfectly equal but they lived much better than the norm. Also, wives if political leaders are known to be very knowledgeable and important for the development of policy. Check the wife of Constantine.
>>7703524
He never said that you retard 9/10 had me for a while.
>>7703527
>wives if political leaders are known to be very knowledgeable and important for the development of policy
So how does this jive with the above statement everybody is defending that men are smarter? And the other statement that "history is proof": of it.
>>7703537
Better fitted for certain roles maybe, you are the insecure bitch who said that. Im fully aware that women do as well as men in math, better in biology and chemistry but poorer in physics and compsci.
>>7703479
>Own and manage property
numerous fucking examples
>participate in politics
All the fucking time you retard. Not all politics is the shit we have now.
>bank accounts
Women have often been the ones to manage the finance of wealthy families.
>>7703547
Source?
>>7701037
False. Not in mammals
>>7703804
Im not here to give him an education in human social structures through history, only call him a retard for having no fucking clue about them.
But one quick example of owning and managing property from sharia law, grabbed of wikipedia:
"There are some restrictions on the master; he may not co-habit with a female slave belonging to his wife,"
Implying then that a wife can own slaves, and they are her property, not an extension of her husbands.
Cited from 'encyclopaedia of islam.'
As for participating in politics, it depends on the political system. Domestic and social influence are more important than the right to be a senator or whatever in systems with very little like that. Domestic power<external power is a retarded meme invented by femenists trying to pretend the social structures and merits therof of 1950s america can be generalized to the study of any other part of human history.
Female and male gender roles can have various amounts of power depending on the rest of the society they exist in, and also what they even specifically are.
>>7703884
Right - then why is "look at any history book" proof of men being smarter?
>>7704428
>everyone on 4chan is the same person
Females are weaker so males can mate and reproduce in a world of lesbians and feminists through means of rape.
/thread?
>>7704463
let this thread die
>>7704473
How cruel
>>7704453
>implying
>>7701404
have you considered that adult human males whose peak of manual labor has been cleaning their room might not be as strong as a fat and built woman who has been working for her entire life? maybe you should try carrying 45 pounds directly above your head for 20 years and see if it's still physically demanding, and if this comparison still is valid and true
do it for science
>>7705706
How does fat help her lifting logs?
>>7706549
This
Dont spout shit here anon
