(I thought) the meme implies all women. Oh I understand your other comment now. My comment is only valid if the meme implied all women, and i had no malicious intent.
If reading as “some”, then yes I fully agree. I guess it depends who is reading it, and I’m assuming it was written that way by design, to get people like us to fight over a misunderstanding.
Sending good vibes🤙
Edit: (I thought)
Edit: edited out my petty comment directed towards a miscommunication that is now resolved.
Edit: understood the misunderstanding. I read the meme as “All”, instead of “some”.
many finds indicate that on this planet existed civilisations different and more advanced even than are own
Insane nonsense
check Velikovsky and Graham Hancock he wrote many books about the subject.
Velikovsky: “Russian, Israeli and American author, known for his fringe catastrophist theories, widely considered as pseudoscientific by mainstream scholars” (wiki)
Graham Hancock: “British author who promotes pseudoscientific theories. Hancock aims to erode trust in known facts and archaeological expertise” (wiki)
Definitely not opportunistic sociopaths trying to distort reality to fit their personal agendas. /s
Neither have any qualifications whatsoever in the subject of history or archeology.
You can downvote me and science, but wake me up if you come up with a real argument disputing the entire field of endocrinology, molecular biology, and the rest of biology by extension. Not to mention archeology and anthropology.
At the very simplest way to understand, you do know the difference between testosterone and estrogen, and their biological mechanisms, correct? Rhetorical.
It’s echo-chamber, culture-war nonsense. There’s a reason men are the vast majority of physical jobs, and it’s not because anyone is stopping qualified women from working.
Just as an example, in my personal experience, we rarely received women’s applications to work warehouse or roofing, and even less who met the qualifications of being able to pick up minimum 50lbs (not that heavy, approximately 2x 24’s of beer) on their own.
I’d also like to point out that, while I’m not trying to minimize her impressive achievements, your friend is from modern society, not ancient. She had the privilege of going to school, being a cheerleader and having free time, instead of cranking out babies in the ancient wilderness.
Tasks based on sex were not so prevalent until high cultures formed…
Like being pregnant and giving birth (as many times as possible), breastfeeding, and raising those same infants while the men are doing tasks that are unfeasible for pregnant breastfeeding women taking care of infants?, like hunting, building shelters and going to war, among other things? (Which some women did, but the majority did not)
Oh, ya ya, for sure. A lot of people in this thread seem to be sharing the same anti-anthropology delusion. Which is very concerning but not surprising in the age of misinformation. More culture-war BS.
Whether that hairless ape was a man or woman also didn’t matter.
Yep, and we can all look at verifiable evidence like professional sports and Olympic records to show…oh, wait a second…
Ok let’s forget that indisputable evidence for a sec…We can look at scientific analysis of dug up remains to see what their body types and structures were like an…d…uh… Huh.
Ok denying all that open-shut evidence, let’s study endocrinology and loo…fuck.
Did women also hunt? Yes.
“As much as men”?
No, beyond any shadow of doubt. Stop trying to white wash over history and verifiable evidence to try and push your personal agenda of stoking culture-wars.
Unless we’re talking about tribes where the men took care of the children, the above statement is exaggerated at best and borders on anti-history/anti-anthropology nonsense at worst.
You might as well post that the men spent as much time taking care of the children than the women. And if you can admit that is false for the majority of human history, then you can clearly see how this being false also disqualifies the “women spent as much time hunting” statement.
Again, there is no debate on the fact that many women were great hunters and not just gatherers, but you also can’t deny that most of the women took care of the kids.
Looks like I took the bait, didn’t I…smh lol
Whatever you choose, don’t rule out using chatGPT to help with coding. You still have to review every line to make sure it’s not gibberish if asking to generate code, but in general, it saves countless hours and will absolutely become a valued asset to your team.
What would be the most profitable path in terms of learning and, if possible, generate a modest income?
GPT might have some insights for you there as well.
I’ve seen someone with 0 coding knowledge make a functional, albeit rudementary, first-person shooter on PC, only using chatGPT.
All it takes is a student to proofread their paper to make sure it’s not complete nonsense. The bare minimum a cheating student should do.
Hello Streisand effect.
Source?
Some heavy projection there, drake. Maybe you should stick to the science. I hope you know that women have pregnancies and feeding the babies with their teats to deal with, along with needing someone to take care of the young children, which incapacitated them from most physically demanding tasks, like hunting or going to war. I’m not talking about non-pregnant, able-bodied women that weren’t tasked with taking care of children, which were an indisputable minority.
Your delusions of pregnant teet-feeding women equally going to hunt and to war in your fantasy have no place here. Be real for one second. ~9 months pregnant + years of raising just the first one, immediately crosses out your claim (and you dont even need to look at the science for that one, i hope). There’s a reason one of the two sexes has testosterone as their primary sex hormone and androgen, and the other has estrogen as their primary.
I suggest taking an endocrinology, archeology and anthropology class, instead of trumping your arguments with nonsense.