Man, reading **** like that REALLY makes me want to try hard in school and get into uni jk why should one try if you're just gonna get **** on no matter wat

If someone said "whites are smarter than blacks because they have higher grades," they'd be called racist.

Yeah, 99% of inventions, discoveries and countries are all done by men, but women are smarter. Female Logic.

sorry but how would you expect otherwise when women weren't even allowed to get educations when these inventions were coming about?

The same way of how uneducated Leonardo da Vinci, Newton and many others have done.

You don't need school education to become a genius because to invent or discover something is not taught to you in school.

Leonardo took art class and money from it,then he could study in his free time
For Newton,wikipedia says "From the ages of 12 through 17, he was educated at The King's School, Grantham (where his signature can still be seen upon a library window sill). He was removed from school, and by October 1659, he was to be found at Woolsthorpe-by-Colsterworth, where his mother, widowed by now for a second time, attempted to make a farmer of him. He hated farming.Henry Stokes, master at the King's School, persuaded his mother to send him back to school so that he might complete his education. This he did at the age of eighteen, achieving an admirable final report."

They had education,and they didn't had to educate kids or other things that were reserved to women.You couldn't have created a motor without knowledge of piston and other things.Womens clearly had enormous limitation,it's like asking someone with asthma to do a marathon without it's inhalerrobably possible,but with huge repercussions and failure possibility

Leonardo was not an "Art Master", his inventions had nothing to do with art. Neither were his discoveries.

Who created these educations? Who wrote all that information that IS educated, before there were any educations at all???

Geniuses who created "Education" were MEN. This "women had no education" is an extremely pathetic excuse.

Except as i said before,the woman didn't had the time nor the liberty thanks to some mens being asses and then saying "it's a rule m'kay?" and we didn't seems to bother that much about it.So it was our role to hunt ,for example, and learn from trial and error.So we ,little by little,created rules,to do and not to do lists,etc...
Now you might say "but they could probably learn at time were they became a little more free!"Well they ******* did,but there was still the family pressure and all.
They were famous cafés and others places were intellectuals would go together to have a drink and discuss in the 17th century in France for example,at a time were money counted a little more than being born male or female.And guess what ? The managers of thoses were mostly females.
Problem is,if you wanted to join an university,you needed more of an education than making clothes and fast explanations from somes thinkers,and it's hard and time consuming to have to learn,manage a salon and educate your family
TL ; DR : We didn't gave them the possibility of trying in the domains were we invented a lot,and we didn't gave them education necessary for advanced domains
As for Leonardo,i stand by what i said :He made money by art first,since he took art class from verroccio in his early years and was kicked out for being too good,and made money from his various paintings and sculpturs,then his talent in drawing coupled with the free time,his absolute thirst of knowledge and Medici needs in ingeniery made him study math ,biology,etc...
Saying that Leonardo wasn't an Art master is literally saying that a big part of his life didn't happened.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_da_Vinci#Verrocchio.27s_workshop.2C_1466.E2.80.9376

, and gain money from it*
: probably*
>>#120 >>#119,

Also Newton did go to college, but women back then also couldn't work unless it was something like baking or sewing. Having a woman do anything complex was laughable.

Well it's not even the school education, they were expected to just stay home and be wives and pop out babies. They were expected to aspire to marriage, to marry someone rich. Men were expected to work hard and be the rich guy women fought over. Men were expected to use their minds, women were expected to use their bodies. At certain points in history women weren't even trusted to vote, you think they'd be allowed to invent anything and get credit for it?

Seriously. How do people on this site manage to forget that?

Because /pol/ bandwagon that's why

I kindle a little hope deep inside my soul that one day fj will stop trying its hardest to ape /pol/ like a bunch of ******* 14 year olds and just post funnies. I CAN DREAM DAMN YOU

WE CAN DREAM DAMN IT!!


WE CAN DREAM...












we can dream...

They aaaaalllll say that, untill it comes time to open jars. Then we'll see whether or not strength is useful.

Except that in fact girls test better because schooling systems were modified to boost the grades of female students.

explain to me how the school system is designed for women

In short, boys are getting lower average grades than girls. Obviously this is a bad thing, since there's no sound reason that that should be the case. Many people will cite that female students used to underperform, but in fact the inverse is true, female students have always performed better, just in different subject areas. Of course the PC rabble decided that girls had to be better in every way.

you're the one saying that boys not being on top is a bad thing...
Still didn't explain how school is designed for women, it's been taught the same way ever since only boys could attend.

I literally just said that boys were never on the top...
Only RICH boys, the farmer's son couldn't go any more than the farmer's daughter.

The focus in education shifted from cultivating the brightest minds to making sure you had 50% of of passing students be girls, which is totally anti-merit. There should never be a time when one student is getting more attention than another because lots of vaginas with good grades looks good.

Something about girls having an easier time sitting still and concentrating than young boys, as they're naturally impulsive and energetic during their childhood.

Black students, however, can't be trusted later on; I know from personal experience.

Nope, just favouritism.

Nice theme.

They get benefits for helping traitors escape.

You mean parents pushing their grills as hard as they can in school. Later on in life grills find their man and live off them

I hear this often, how is school geared towards women?

My English teacher (and she said some other teachers did the sameaswell) actually quite openly admitted that she was harsher for boys in her class than for the girls. Both behaviour-wise, because girls are stealthier when they do something, and test-wise. She'd grade the boys' tests much harsher than the girls' and be harder on the boys if she caught them doing something like cheating or not paying attention.

Then again, it's all anecdotal.

Were your English tests open ended? I'm assuming they are but I just didn't see a lot of those in school.
Was usually a cut and dry correct definition or correct answer, even for a lot of the short answer questions. Couldn't really see a teacher being harsher on one student over the other if they both picked B.

We did have a lot of open ended tests, since Belgium doesn't have standardized tests.
Certain things couldn't really be open ended, like vocabulary. But we were allowed to use synonyms if we didn't know the exact word from the vocabulary. And she'd be much harsher on that. Or for a grammar test where mutliple tenses were possible for a sentence, but she would suddenly pick one of those and declare all the other viable ones wrong.

Sounds like a jerk teacher, in a lot of advanced or Dual Credit English classes we could "argue" about vocab definitions or similarities, but that was usually because of certain regional dialects, or she had explained the word badly in class. Or if we had to use the word in a sentence and our use was different then what she gathered from our sentence.
One of my friends would always write a sentence about an old man who disliked the government for a word he didn't know and it usually worked in his favor, at least better than if he had left it blank every time.