This might be a slightly unusual redpill post, however I believe in scientific methods and reasoning and believe that a lot of theories coming out from a few particular fields, are profoundly influencing us and the children that grow up, in highly negative way, but also the political and judicial discourse. Thus it becomes highly interesting and vital to understand and learn the greater picture. Also it should shed light on a lot of the flaws and unscientific methods used by these so called social, gender and equality scientists. Which should not be allowed to be called scientists, if they refuse to use the scientific model but instead live after unproven hypothesis and use shame tactics against real evidence, they don’t fit in the academic world.

About

This post will examine the difference in studies carried out by scientist operating in traditional fields like biology, psychology compared to those operating in social and gender studies. The former being known to follow strict traditional proving hypothesis, experiment, question hypothesis models. While the latter, highly influenced by the equality and feminist movement, seem to only focus on hypothesis and discard uncomfortable facts, questions raised by other fields. Following their own discourse.

The findings and theories, studies are based on a Norwegian TV show, Brainwashing Norway, where a known Norwegian comedian, Harald Eia, sets out to find out about gender difference in interests patterns. Surprisingly and in a pleasant way, the show goes about the question in a very methodical and non-biased way.

You can either watch it or read my summery of the key findings.

Link to the Show ( ~ 1 h long)

Due to post limit I'll post the summery in a comment to this