its obvious to me why the whole "girlboss" thing is a meme

[lonelyjak]

generally speaking, the reason why females make poorer leaders etc isnt necessarily because theyre female, rather its because society (as in guys) always give females a break, therefore females never have to "man" up, since females never have to man up theyre never forced to improve or work against pressure in some fashion. guys would be similarly incompetent at most things if they always had a silverspoon in their mouths and never had to work hard for anything. so ironically it IS about gender but ISNT about gender at the same time

im not saying anything revolutionary, and im sure most guys here probably intuit this already. I just think its funny that society in general is oblivious to such an obvious truth. this just goes to show how far society is detached from reality while still having the delusion that it sees things very clearly

[eldajaal1488]

yeah i dont think they are that useless, just dont have to be competent

[lonelyjak]

yeah i dont think they are that useless, just dont have to be competent

I just realized that this is the answer to my other thread:

https://bookism.net/showthread.php?tid=12304

normies are so rigid and clueless because they're usually middle class and sheltered from the realities of life. most likely all the problems of modern society basically boil down to people being too "soft". the irony is that this is unavoidable; as civilization advances, life gets easier and people become more complacent/incompetent. its all a cycle, like that one stupid "hard times create strong men" meme.

[Honest]

Didn't read but it's signalling their "high quality" to attract chads. Same reason "girl boss" females reject men so harshly (signals that they are very exclusive and "high quality"). The "bad and boujee" thing is the same

[lonelyjak]

Didn't read but it's signalling their "high quality" to attract chads. Same reason "girl boss" females reject men so harshly (signals that they are very exclusive and "high quality"). The "bad and boujee" thing is the same

because you didnt read the OP the thrust of the post went over your head. im talking about something different than what youre talking about

that being said, the bad and boujee stuff is so cringe lmao

[Honest]

Skimmed over OP and couldn't make sense of it

[lonelyjak]

Skimmed over OP and couldn't make sense of it

yup, keyword skimmed. no wonder you didnt understand it

[AntonioJuraz]

All the women managers I know have a seriousness about them that you don't usually see in regular women.

[Steppenwolf]

they make poorer leaders because they aren't supposed to lead

[lonelyjak]

All the women managers I know have a seriousness about them that you don't usually see in regular women.

yeah thats why in the OP I made sure to say that I was making a general statement. ive had competent women managers before, so its not a 100% rule, but across the board in terms of averages I do think that women are oftentimes less competent because they have guys around them willing to take up the slack

they make poorer leaders because they aren't supposed to lead

yeah and the OP is explaining why theyre not supposed to lead. there are other biological/psychological reasons as well, and im not excluding them, but the OP is one of the major components of it though

[Steppenwolf]

yeah and the OP is explaining why theyre not supposed to lead. there are other biological/psychological reasons as well, and im not excluding them, but the OP is one of the major components of it though

no, it isn't an explanation for it. the explanation for it is determined by their gender role itself, and this isn't confined to biological reasons either. they simply aren't supposed to be leaders starting by the reason that Women are too much of herd and social creatures, and a leader is never that. they may be charismatic, but there's always something much obscure going on behind the scenes. leaders have divergence, and women are more of a single entity with many faces

[lonelyjak]

yeah and the OP is explaining why theyre not supposed to lead. there are other biological/psychological reasons as well, and im not excluding them, but the OP is one of the major components of it though

no, it isn't an explanation for it. the explanation for it is determined by their gender role itself, and this isn't confined to biological reasons either. they simply aren't supposed to be leaders starting by the reason that Women are too much of herd and social creatures, and a leader is never that. they may be charismatic, but there's always something much obscure going on behind the scenes. leaders have divergence, and women are more of a single entity with many faces

its funny how bad your reading is, you always miss important points that I make. nothing you said is mutually exclusive with what I just said

youre the definition of a redpilled midwit

[Steppenwolf]

yeah and the OP is explaining why theyre not supposed to lead. there are other biological/psychological reasons as well, and im not excluding them, but the OP is one of the major components of it though

no, it isn't an explanation for it. the explanation for it is determined by their gender role itself, and this isn't confined to biological reasons either. they simply aren't supposed to be leaders starting by the reason that Women are too much of herd and social creatures, and a leader is never that. they may be charismatic, but there's always something much obscure going on behind the scenes. leaders have divergence, and women are more of a single entity with many faces

its funny how bad your reading is, you always miss important points that I make. nothing you said is mutually exclusive with what I just said

youre the definition of a redpilled midwit

no, you are just wrong

nothing "redpilled" about what i said either, gender is LAW, and the hint to your thread is in femininity itself. not that "muh pooor wymynn weren't pressured enough" you nerd

maybe they are never pressured enough because we know they are fycking retarded?

[lonelyjak]

yeah and the OP is explaining why theyre not supposed to lead. there are other biological/psychological reasons as well, and im not excluding them, but the OP is one of the major components of it though

no, it isn't an explanation for it. the explanation for it is determined by their gender role itself, and this isn't confined to biological reasons either. they simply aren't supposed to be leaders starting by the reason that Women are too much of herd and social creatures, and a leader is never that. they may be charismatic, but there's always something much obscure going on behind the scenes. leaders have divergence, and women are more of a single entity with many faces

its funny how bad your reading is, you always miss important points that I make. nothing you said is mutually exclusive with what I just said

youre the definition of a redpilled midwit

no, you are just wrong

>gets correctly called out for his misguided response and poor reading comprehension
>n-no youre wrong