Why are women so much more often status quo than men?

OK but he didn't say "women are disgusting whores" or something retarded. He pointed out that women tend to be more averse to taking risks, which has plenty to back it up. You're nitpicking the form of his argument instead of responding to his claim, which is both relevant and well-supported by that field.

Men are more willing to fight and die for a cause.

Marxism Leninism is a science.

Every fucking thread…

Pretty much this. As a woman, you get much more scrutinized for radical beliefs, and what's worse is people think you need to be """""protected for your own good"""" like a child or something.

Also you have to be likable at all times or you're a "bitch".

It's infuriating, but I've noticed this fear when trying to convert my female friends too. They just don't want to rock the boat.

...

I mean if by science you mean, like early modern philosophers did, it's a system of rigourous thinking, then sure I guess. But if you mean it's a science the same way biology or physics are sciences…heh…heh heh heh heh

Is this Foucault's goatse reaction face?

WEW
E
W

Evolutionary psychology cannot be tested and thus does not fit the criterion in the scientific method. We cannot just build a time machine and see for ourselves, so theoretical analysis is useless because it cannot be verified.

For comparison, we've actually seen simple forms of life evolve in controlled experiments.

1) not the same poster
2) I don`t see how OP`s question could not be explained partly by evolutionary psychology and partly by social conditioning (examples ,>>826996)

Please read Dawkins.

I never said observable differences are not real, only that evo psych is useless to understanding them because a theory that cannot be tested is, by definition, unscientific.
It is psychology, after all. It's always toed the line of what constitutes science, and this particular example crosses it.
He's not a bad scientist but he is an academic elitist. Epigenetics has already been shown to have tremendous potential as a legitimate scientific field but he brushes it off because he doesn't want competition. It's amusingly common.

Evolutionary psychology is largely based around behaviorism so it would be intellectually dishonest to deny the other on simple basis you don`t personally like the idea that it can be applied to humans, therefor validating certain elements of social Darwinism(for example criminality being partly genetic).

Social Darwinism is invalid anyway because it's not an attempt to be scientific, it's a purely political phenomenon. It can easily be refuted.

I am not making a political statement against evolutionary psychology, i am repeating the genuine concerns of many scientific experts.

But criminals(those who commit violent crime) do empirically speaking have abnormal brains compared to general population.

But this is just me being stuck in a mindset of correlation = causation, so don`t feel need to respond. Sorry about that.

Honestly I'm just shocked you haven't mentioned how "criminals" are atavistic

Sure, but psychiatry and research into mental illness has done well to explain this. They haven't actually evolved to think differently, human genetic variance is very subtle. MAOA variance, for example, only influences how people respond to emotional distress and will probably be controllable with meds in the future.

I`m just going to read book about this, seems like Holla Forums fucked my brains semi-permanently and I need to re-educate myself.

Women are responsible for keeping children safe.
Thus they have increased need for security.

This is why it's more likely to see a revolutionary 50 yo man than a revolutionary 50 yo woman.

..

Unless said woman went full third wave feminism

POSITIVIST GET OFF MY BOARD

tankie gets it mostly right imo, and honestly thank god women are more risk averse, we would be extinct if they were all as retarded as us

Ah so all we have to do is measure their skulls and well know!

Fuck leftypol is autistic

Because they tend to be very emotional

At times, ya.

Thanks for not getting discouraged.

Take a drink!

Men are more likely to be risk takers, especially since you don't need as many of them to repopulate an area. Also, many woman fighters will have to give up being mothers, because pregnant women need safety for their children, and can't do too many physically dangerous tasks, like fighting wars.

*during pregnancy, of course.

You know women who are very different from the women I've met.

why is everyone here talking about pua evopsych lol

i swear this board is indistinguishable from Holla Forums sometimes