>click on video where historian analyzes accuracy of media
>the historian is a woman
>close video
>open other video where historian analyzes piece of media
>the historian is a man
>watch video
Why is this so commonplace?

>>507135304 (OP)
A woman botched my ingrown hair surgery and now I have a permanent spot that oozes keratin on my taint. A man would never have let this happen.

>>507135304 (OP)
We view history as a male pastime in the amateur sense. We likely carry that over into the academic as well. Men and women are incredulous of experts of their hobbies in a gender switch scenario. If a dude with a pot belly, and a camouflaged ball cap was explaining girl math would women watch it? Hell, that is value calculation and cost-benefit analysis. That is nerdier than history.

>>507135304 (OP)
A woman's interpretation of history is always
>white men are the great Satan and that is why we need to destroy our countries with brown men
There's usually no other viewpoint of argument made. That's always the end point.

because you are an incel

>>507136299
I've only found one exception that proves this rule, Constitutional Clarion. She is a biofem but also unbiased in presenting Australia's political structure.

>>507135304 (OP)
Because women are for making and raising children and are legendary useless at any other task.
Your socialized simp brain denies this fact but your chad-like reptile brain knows it instinctively

>>507135304 (OP)
when the man talks in a onions accent I must close too

>>507135304 (OP)
For me aswel, I cant take a video about history seriously if a woman is the one explaining, I dunno why but that happens every single time, my brain automatically rejects the idea that women should be teaching historical stuff, I dont feel like that about other subjects

>>507135304 (OP)

And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.

Also any time women do vidya reviews I'm turning it off.