Thread 96373091

>>96373091 (OP)
It turns out that men can gather and women can hunt
I would imagine that the number of people hunting matters more than the individual skill of each hunter

>live in the era where warrior women are now next to non-existant
Why do I still live and breathe.

>>96373096
>I would imagine that the number of people hunting matters more than the individual skill of each hunter
No it would matter a lot, people died a lot during prehistoric hunts and losing an even more sizable number of your tribe each hunt to a bison would kill off the tribe quickly.

>>96373091 (OP)
-tic in a setting where food preservation and large scale agriculture exists such as in many tabletop roleplaying games implied defaults.

>>96373091 (OP)
>artist imagines pre-historic people did not clean themselves
>unlike almost all animals

>>96373131
Oh shit, thought that was the author.

>>96373131
Just visit India once.

>>96373144
That's not pre-historic. Also: no.

>>96373091 (OP)
>>96373092
Citation needed
Also hunter =/= fighter, not that I believe this feminist le empowered popsci propagandaslop is even accurate.

>>96373091 (OP)
>>96373092
I'd take these studies a lot more seriously if tribal societies didn't still exist that directly contradicted their "Findings"
Like in order for them to be correct, you have to accept the idea that despite being equally suited to the role of hunting, or better, somehow all known recorded societies shifted to a system where men did the hunting for seemingly no reason since, again, women were either just as suited to do it or better at it.
It's complete drivel.

>>96373091 (OP)
I remember these articles. Wasn't the trick that they were counting trapping and fishing when saying "hunting"?

>>96373160
It absolutely is. And I genuinely would not be surprised if the people who did the "study" forgot that hunter-gatherer societies existed within recently recorded history, and still exist today and a cursory look at them can reveal that this is a crock of shit.

>>96373164
It's either "Women were good at hunting**********************" or the studies were poorly done but got published and pushed anyways for ideological reasons.

>>96373092
>females have a better endurance
>prehistoric humans were persistance hunters
>science advances
Sheesh.

nobody has ever denied women's place in the kitchen lol
>OMG PREHISTORIC WOMEN CAUGHT RABBITS AND DEER AND COOKED IT TO FEED CAVEMEN
yes wonderful now where's my steak

>>96373161
>>96373164
The usual, archeologists found some prehistoric graves where women were buried with hunting weapons and an anthropologist who wrote the study took it as evidence of prehistoric female hunters being commonplace. The study also proposed the idea that ancient women were better suited to ancient style of hunting due to oestrogen and adiponecting delaying fatigue in long term endurance activities like exhausting prey over time.

Is there some special worldview that has to be protected by argueing that prehistoric peoples had some kind of social set up where women only gathered and men did all the hunting?

>>96373092
>one (1) grave
>had "a well-stocked, big-game hunting toolkit"
>only contained carcass processing tools
>didn't contain a weapon used for hunting
>was found alongside other 11 women
>none had weapons

Women never did shit throughout any and every period of history.

They have literally no excuse now and they're still not doing shit.

>>96373102
it's so over bro, cavemen had it so good, having sexy primitive girls hunting for them before breeding in public. We were robbed.

>>96373160
>not that I believe this feminist le empowered popsci propagandaslop is even accurate.
This.

>>96373306
>Is there some special worldview that has to be protected by argueing that prehistoric peoples had some kind of social set up where women only gathered and men did all the hunting?
Yes. It's called a belief in truth and the scientific method.

>>96373092
>Researchers found the female body was better suited for endurance activity
That's patently untrue. The female pelvis is adapted for childbirth in a way that directly increases the energy expenditure of walking and running.

>>96373182
This reminds me of when I was in school. When a girl did something different, it was "girls are better than boys", when a boy did the same thing, it was "showing off". And people wonder why misogyny is on the rise.

>>96373391

One part of it can be explained by men who bought the egalitarian line and are now disappointed and resentful, there are also more darkies among us these days unfortunately, whose misogyny is more overt. I also recall seeing a study that showed that non-whites were more likely to identify as incels and were also more likely to be fans of that mulatto pimp, Andrew Tate.

>>96373092
This reminds me of that PHWOOOOAR, WOMEN HAVE HIGHER PAIN TOLERANCE THAN MEN that was making the rounds where they were comparing women in the midst of childbirth, i.e. their bodies being flooded with painkilling hormones, to hormonally stable men when actual studies reveal men tend to have a higher pain tolerance to women on any given day a woman ISN'T giving birth.

Y'all were baited again, dumbasses.

>>96373092
If women are so much better at long distance running, why does every military in the world hold them to a lower cardio standard than men?

>>96373451
OP gave me an excuse to express my disdain for women, I win in the end

>>96373456

I think those are edge cases like ultramarathons or extreme swimming distances like crossing the English channel or something. Most women have smaller lungs, get stress fractures easier etc.

>>96373447
It's not even close. Those experiments where people have to keep their hands in ice water had men having more than twice the pain tolerance compared to women on average

>>96373447
If you want to see the most horrifying sexist bullshit on Twitter, just search "white women"

>>96373117
That's probably the exact reason bison hunts were rare. This article is talking about regular prehistoric hunting, like rabbits

>>96373160
/thread
Sneak attacks on animals are far different from close combat with humans who are not only aware of you and attacking back, but are also male and thus bigger and stronger than you.

>>96373155
>That's not pre-historic
They haven't moved forward as a society since the IVC.

Woke archaeology has been an absolute disaster. Fuck off. Just fuck off to Hell.

Makes you wonder how people who are 50% of the population, are just as good if not better at everything than the other 50%, yet are always at the bottom of the barrel.

I can't help noticing that not a single game or even a vague "setting" has been mentioned in this thread.

>>96373091 (OP)
That looks like a BBC (british broadcasting company) article I'd look at that with a Carthage level of salt seeing as this is the same company who tried to say blacks were always part of Britain when they really weren't but you know gay race communists have to gay race communist everything

>>96373735
It's retarded as fuck, so the assumed setting should be DnD 5e, as usual.

>>96373092
This is no different than the time they found a woman buried with a sword and started running articles about the female vikings who were just as powerful and respected as their male counterparts. This is bullshit science.

>>96373091 (OP)
I wouldn't be surprised if this was true and that these people were out competed by tribes that had specialize in hunting and women specialize in other tasks.

>>96374552
I suspect that it is more likely a case of the article writers being overly broad with the term "hunting." It seems that archeological evidence for females participating in small game trapping was found (which is in function more like gathering), but the article writers have interpreted "trapping" as "hunting" and suggesting that all "hunting" was "large game hunting."

>>96373161
>>96373171
About that. https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/07/01/1184749528/men-are-hunters-women-are-gatherers-that-was-the-assumption-a-new-study-upends-i
>>96373317
Said the retard who never did anything other be a whiny faggot.
>>96373476
No one needed to know you have brain damage .
>>96373732
>Wwwhaaaa! The past turns out to not fit my dumb world view.

>>96373091 (OP)
>>96373312
>>96373331
>>96373447
These.
I don't think anyone, but the most clinically retarded npcs believe these studies anymore.

>>96374707
That "study" doesn't count because it's looking at modern groups. They're literally wearing clothes from the first world.

>>96373456
In 2017 the US Army published a study about how it would be possible for women to be held to the same physical standards as men. It required a 3 year intensive physical training and careful diet course which would bring up the average female recruit to the level of a fresh male recruit. Even then stress fractures and joint damage would be expected if they were to carry the standard loads. So it is possible, just not practical.

>>96374749
>t. retarded npc
>>96374771
>I just looked at a picture and nothing else.

>>96373091 (OP)
I think this is more a barbarians than fighters
>>96373735
This is just a retarded 12 year olds like >>96373226 talk about women thread. Little to nothing about games will be said here.

>>96374812
Retarded npc mad. Put on a muzzle and keep social distance from 4chan, lol.

>>96373091 (OP)
>hunters
We have archery and javelin throw at the Olympics, we can compare male and female results (world records in the disciplines, for example). We even have Olympic fencing, HEMA and historical medieval battles, where you can put male/female competitors.

lol, people really won't give up on the endurance hunting meme

>>96374874
Good job finding yourself, retard fag,

>>96373306
Arguing for that The Nuclear Family model is older than it is.

>>96374552
Division of labor is less about sexism and patriarchy and more that someone needs to stay home, look after the children, and do the work that needs to be done while other people are away chasing down animals to feed the whole group. In a purely pragmatic sense, do you send out the women, who are needed to feed and nurture the young, or do you send out the men, who are naturally larger, stronger, and have no in-built biological function that allows them to better feed and care for the young?

If you look throughout all of human history, across the entire fucking planet, regardless of climate, time period, or practically any other factors, you will always find that the sex-based division of labor is not only universal, but desired by the women who choose comfort and safety as often as possible

>>96375257
What does that have to do with playing women in a table top game?

If women are so strong and good at fighting why can they never fend me off when I rape them?

>>96375315
This thread is not about sheep, dumbass.

>>96373306
Less about protecting and more about rejecting pseudo-scientific bullshit from opportunistic retards with an agenda and ideology to push. For all the same reasons people reject and mock Flat Earth believers, people reject soft science social justice advocates attempting to rewrite the history that has been documented and studied for thousands of years and has never once displayed the kind of modern marxist ideology that present day academics are declaring with the most minimal and flimsy pieces of evidence. Like when some self-appointed expert found maybe a dozen Greek pottery fragments that seemed to depict homosexuality, out of thousands, and that got spun into the narrative that Greece was extremely accepting and supportive of homosexuality, despite all records and stories from that era showing that the things that Greeks had to say about homosexuals were mostly slurs and disparagement.

>>96375340
I know women are stupid and pathetically easy to sway but calling them sheep is still a bit much.

>>96375341
tl;dr huge butthurt that people who know what they are talking about disagree with /pol/ retardation.

>>96375354
The joke
.
.
.
Your marble filled head.

>>96373091 (OP)
>caring about realism in FANTASY
Red flag, your games are shit.

>>96375368
OK. I'm gonna rape you now.

>>96375387
You will miss and rape your own ass.

>>96375405
Your ass is too fat for anyone to miss.

>>96375424
Nope, I am not your mom.

>>96373091 (OP)
Maybe. However, in most of recorded human history, they are unrealistic. In medieval settings especially so.

>>96375433
Correct, you're my bitch.

>>96375464
Nope sorry. I am not grazing in a field.

>>96375445
Yes, you don't know about what is realistic or not.

>>96375495
I do and it is very unrealistic mostly.

>>96375509
Nope sorry, retard fag.

>>96375357
They literally have no actual evidence to support their claim, but they are moving forward with the assertion that eons ago, female hunters were totally a huge real deal big thing that happened.

>>96375512
It looks more like you are just too retarded to understand any studies, That or you go out of your way to not read them because the idea that some old ideas may be wrong ruins your butthole.

>>96374790
>cavewomen
>just as capable as men according to the science
>viking women
>just as capable as men according to the science
>modern women
>need lowered standards
What the fuck happened to women? Did the Black Death kill off all women with those caveman muscle mommy genes?

>>96375551
>It looks more like you are just too retarded to understand any studies
Speak for yourself. Academia is rife with studies that do not hold up to any scrutiny.

>>96375632
>What the fuck happened to women?
Too much TV and fast food. True story.

>>96375653
Ah, so you are a retard who is just buttblasted that academia disagrees with some stupid /pol/ shit

>>96373091 (OP)
>women are just as physically capable as men
Cool, so when can we start pitting men against women in sports without the tranny loophole?

>>96375717
>dude trust the science
Lol it's amazing that you think you have a coherent argument here.

>>96373091 (OP)
>>96373092
No one with more than room-temperature IQ takes these types of articles seriously. It's not the subject matter itself, but how it's presented.
It's in the same category as those science articles where they take an off-hand quote from a researcher and spin it to the absolute extreme.
>"yeah while we were excavating these ruins, we found the body of a man holding an infant in his arms. It was quite odd, and a bit sad..."
>news article: BRONZE-AGE MEN MAY HAVE BEEN STAY AT HOME DADS, FINDINGS SUGGEST
it's all clickbait pseudo-science presented in a way to garner the most views possible.

>>96375848
Implying I am replying to an argument and not just the butthurt of some retard.
>>96375881
>t. faggot with a IQ below room temperature

>>96375937
Terrible hill to die on, but at least you're fucking dead. PopSci articles like this aren't studies, they aren't scientific, and they don't prove anything. You really shouldn't waste your time trying to defend them because you think you're "owning the chuds" or whatever. You don't care about the truth, science, academia or anything else. You're just a pitiful contrarian faggot who would side with anyone who seems to disagree with some amorphous "bad people" category that you have convinced yourself cannot be right about anything for any reason.

>>96375988
tl;dr derp durr durr

>>96374707
>About that.
>Their findings — published in the journal PLOS One this week — is that in 79% of the societies for which there is data, women were hunting.
You ever hear of PLOS One before? They have a terrible reputation of publishing tons of studies, and then retracting them later.
https://archive.is/1EIvn
>“The footprints that systematic fraud leaves in the literature are so massive that there’s no way that it’s just a couple of bad authors,” says PNAS study co-author Reese Richardson, a metascientist at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois. “There is complicity from within the journal-appointed editors that allows for this to happen.”

And that's on top of the fact that Cara Wall-Scheffler is a feminist pseudo-academic whose primary academic accomplishments amount to pushing this singular narrative that women were always uniquely and undeniably equipped to be amazing hunters. Not just that they did hunt, a thing that no one actually disputes, but that women were "the best" and most revered hunters. She has otherwise gone completely unnoticed until she started pushing this narrative.

>>96373091 (OP)
It says 'hunters', not fighters. Guess you can't read in addition to having no common sense.

>>96373091 (OP)
>>96373092
You know the biggest indicator that this is bullshit is that they are all covered up as to not violate the sensibilities of modern puritanical liberal americans.

You can literally see modern hunter gatherers don't have shirts or tunics or being covered in furs. The are topless and often bottomless too. If you can't even get that part right, or you're in denial of reality about such an innocuous aspect such as clothing ( or lack thereof), how can you be trusted that what you say about gender norms is true?

>>96373091 (OP)
-ic but it is fun to put them in fiction where you don't need to justify women warriors like you do in reality, especially if you reference the amazons or the valkyries.

>>96376044
>You ever hear of PLOS One before? They have a terrible reputation of publishing tons of studies, and then retracting them later.
Then post them retracting this, dumbass
Oh, never mind. the rest of your post just shows that you are retarded and butthurt about the idea of these kinds of studies.

>>96376092
Blind trust does you no favors, benchode. Now go calm down before you shit yourself.

>>96376108
So you have nothing showing that they are wrong or that they retracted this study. Just like you have nothing in your head.

>>96373091 (OP)
Ah yes. Modern revisionist feminist archeology.
>>96373092
>endurance hunter
Has never been documented outside of one tribe in Africa. And in this case, it's men exclusively doing the hunting. Moreover it ignores the logistics of hunting such as carrying the hunted animals back to camp and the fact that children need to be reared which even in tribal societies tends to be that of the women. Especially since breastfeeding is required for infants.

The reality is that most tribal hunters were ambushers, trappers, etc. Especially in northern climes where brains tended to be bigger, there is no reason to believe human beings wouldn't use their brain power to overcome the need for endurance hunting. Why spend all day hunting and exhausting your bodily resources when you can just kill an animal within a manner of minutes without needing to exhaust yourself? Most tribe societies have figured that out.

>>96376075
Modern hunter gatherers groups live in places where you can go without little to no clothes. In the past that would not always been possible, such as the ice age.

>>96376123
I have an untrustworthy publication and a one-trick pony researcher, pushing a claim that has little evidence, observable, nor recorded. You have blind faith and trust in "the experts" despite having not read the study or anything else to do with the topic. You're angry that people you've decided are your enemies are disagreeing with people you've decided are infallible authority.

>>96376138
>Ah yes. Modern revisionist feminist archeology.
Said by the retarded person.
>endurance hunter has never been documented outside of one tribe in Africa. And in this case, it's men exclusively doing the hunting.
Do you have a source for this.

>>96376165
So again you have nothing. It's ironic you keep going durr durr You have blind faith derp when you probably have not even read what was linked in this thread. If there is something wrong with the study you should be able to show it.

>>96376188
If you consider that nothing, then you're in debt. Pay up, retard.

>>96376197
If you had a brain you would see the irony of you saying that, you retarded faggot.

Why do people have such hangups on female vs male humans in fantasy when the difference between a male or female human, and say, an orc or elf is expected to be much bigger? Why does nobody ever pitch a fit about a human warrior regardless of gender somehow standing toe to toe with something much bigger and stronger if physical mass really matters?

>>96376211
>no u
Listen man, you're doing a really wonderful job humiliating yourself, but if you're reduced to kicking and screaming, you're better off just ghosting the thread and running off somewhere else where you won't feel so fucking impotent.

>>96376238
You only think that a No u because you are retarded.

>studies say
lol
>b-but
lol

>>96376223
Because this entire argument is a proxy for election tourists to talk about politics

>>96376271
If there is issues with the studies people here should be able to show what they are without crying about feminists, social justice, or marxist ideology like a retard.

>>96373091 (OP)
>>96373092

First fight: male vs female
Second fight: male vs male

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhB-HQK28GY

>>96375717
And you're a retard that blindly accepts anything that comes out of acedemia because some washed up English major put it in an article on the internet

I wonder about this. What did infertile women do during those times aside from not reproducing? Like they can't wet nurse, they don't have kids to take care of so what use were they?

Look man I'm as much of a realist as the other guy but if you train a woman to be good at using a pointy stick she will easily kill an untrained schmuck or an animal. It's not some crazy plot twist you're talking about here

>>96376352
Said the retarded high school dropout who can't show anything wrong with the studies.

>>96376390
>https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/54722788
>It's after the remains of a teenage girl, who lived around 9,000 years ago, was discovered at a burial site in Peru alongside "a well-stocked, big-game hunting toolkit".
The evidence for this entire fucking thread is that they found a female skeleton buried with hunting weapons
That's literally it
There was no study
It was a conclusion based on circumstantial evidence
You blithering moron

>>96376332
>low sample size
>lack of meaningful evidence
>mountain of anthropological information, history, and cultural info from these tribes that contradicts the claim
>actual information presented is 1/3rd of the tribes said something about women sometimes hunting big game
>"I'm an expert and I agree because one time we found remains with hunting tools and those remains WERE FEMALE"
>researched with an obvious agenda who outright declares confirmation bias in her research
>claims of male researchers being obviously sexist, implying that they fudged or otherwise falsified data for reasons that the researcher cannot explain, but still holds as undeniably true
>NPR
>ur gay

>>96376374
>>96376406
I'm pretty sure that women can use a bow in hunting with almost the same success as men.

>>96376353
gathering, weaving, preparing skins, getting rape.

>>96376432
you do realize that draw strength is dependent on physical strength, correct?

>>96376452
We are talking about hunting, not about distant shooting. Female world records in Archery are pretty close to male's, for example.

>>96376432
That too, yes.

>>96376452
It does but a woman can manage strength enough to propel an arrow into killing a defenseless animal. OP's post is a nothingburger and he is baiting faggot

>>96376475
That is with modern day compound bows that take much less strength to draw
Higher draw strength = arrows fly farther and piece flesh deeper
It's basic fucking logic

>>96376406
>you: a female skeleton buried with hunting weapons
>the article: people were buried with big-game hunting tools of these 11 were female and 16 male.
Good job showing that you did not even read the article you stupid faggot
>>96376417
So you have nothing. Just like the inside of your head.