>>12000000nice get but its actually the truth
Men have to overcome the evolutionary pressure of compensating for their flaws to attract a mate. The entire academia is literally built on the fact that the nerd couldn't get enough sex so he compensated by building up his intelligence expecting to win the hearts of society with a major invention and therefor of women through his reputation, and not through the standard alpha male characteristics. If science wasn't all about reputation, then how come there's literally not a single anonymous paper ever released "for the sake of science" and it's all a backstabbing shitfest of who gets to be the big boy who'll get the ovations - why's it all about reputation and that alone?
Women on the other hand do not think like this. They can get sex right on demand when they're 12, 13, 14, 15, up to 50 and probably beyond. The only issue with them is whether their mate is attractive according to their perceived values. So what they do is they build on the values that they seek, like for an example a girl who wants to marry a smart guy to not disappoint her family will most likely go for a phd, one that wants to marry a businessman alpha male type of guy will most likely go for an mba, and so on but will never actually tryhard for reputation because think about it - a half-assed PhD is more than enough to attract the most successful modern scientist as long as she's not fat, while tryharding it and trying to replicate what males do will only increase the quantity of such males who'll chase her which is pointless because 1 is sufficient, at the cost of literally wasting her life in a frenzied obsession to do it.
Now keep in mind I'm not actually a feminist trying to justify why women underperform like this, in fact I'm the opposite of a feminist, but this is simply the truth. They can be as smart as us if they tried. They don't try because we don't put that pressure on them and there's no reason to try.
