Instigator / Pro

Historically speaking, men are smarter than women


The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
Better sources
Better legibility
Better conduct

After not so many votes...

It's a tie!
Publication date
Last updated date
Number of rounds
Time for argument
Two hours
Max argument characters
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Contender / Con

No information

Round 1
Throughout history, men have been smarter than women. Now, this isn't to say that women aren't smart or didn't have the capabilities to become smart/smarter than men. In history, women were opposed against and were forced to do "woman things." This doesn't have to be about genders, if the roles were switched, then women would've been smarter than men in history, it's only common sense, let me explain. Let's say there are 2 individuals (no genders assigned), Person A and Person B. Person A gets educated throughout his childhood and teenage years, and travels the world, and has lots of experience with different types people and cultures. Person B on the other hand, doesn't get educated nor go to school. They only stay at home or occasionally go somewhere close to their home, and really don't see much of the world, and have little to no experience with life itself, because they didn't have the oppurtunities to do so. Who is smarter then, Person A, who has been educated, and has went through life gathering lots of knowledge and wisdom, or Person B, who was never educated and had little experience with the life outside of their village or city? I'm not claiming women couldn't have been smarter than men, but because they were limited, men were smarter throughout history. 
Historically speaking, both are somewhat equally intelligent.

Men are stupid for being stronger, yet using their strength for destruction and making everyone feel bad.

Examples of such men were Hitler and other war criminals.

Statistically, women live longer than men.

Women are experts at making everything revolve around them.

When a man makes a mistake, he remains silent and takes the guilt.

When a woman makes a mistake, she blames everyone for it to the point where nobody can blame her anymore.

Woman always has the excuse for her behavior.

Meanwhile, a man is guilty for being a man.

How many times did you see a woman slapping a man? Plenty of times. Every time, somehow, the man was at fault for being slapped.

If people see a man slapping a woman, they attack him.

If people see a woman slapping a man, they dont do anything.

Such master indoctrination cannot be a product of anything else but master mind of a woman.
Round 2
What do you mean by men are stupid for being stronger? 

You talk about women being master minds for blaming others, which I'm guessing you're kidding, but if you aren't, then this is only in the last 50-100 years. We're talking historically. Women are smarter right now, as it's statistically proven, however, the debate revolves around history. 

Throughout history, it was actually the opposite. Men would hit women, and women would have little to no rights (this is clearly not a good thing, I'm not encouraging this). Women and men aren't historically the same. 

Imagine yourself if you never went to school or college, didn't have internet and had no clue what went around in the world, and you were only limited to sitting in your house and doing "women things." 

Your claims are a bit childish and aren't backed up by anything, except mere jokes.
"Historically" includes all history. Which means the previous 100 years are to be taken into account equally as previous 1000 years.

In fact, even 1000 years ago, women controlled a lot of things in society.

Men were dying in wars because of women.

War was an obligation for a man, but not for a woman.

Remember that throught entire history, men were always stronger.

Yet women ended up enslaving them, slowly but surely.

This means men cannot possibly be smarter than women.

Your argument is equal to that of claiming that Hitler won ww2 because he was winning at beginning.

However, its the end that counts.

Men lost and ended up enslaved. Too bad. Lets cry now.
Round 3
Define what being "Smarter" is please. You give examples of women seducing men? Your arguments lack emphasis on the actual topic of the debate. IQ wise, sure, some women in history might've been smart, but talking generally, men were smarter, as they got educated, and generally had more experience with life.

You take into example a very small percentage of women who "won" men over, which is still not on the topic of smartness. I'm not sexist nor am trying to be, I'm only claiming that men are considerably smarter historically, not right now. You brought up Hitler as an example while that's a completely different story. If it was the same "debate" then the question would be something like "Was Nazi Germany the strongest army from 1939-1942?"

I don't want to be disrespectful or anything, I like your arguments but I think we can both agree that historically speaking, men are smarter than women. Even according to, 96% of the inventions made were made by men, and the 4% of the remaining inventions that were made by women, were mostly done so in the last 25-75 years, and comparing 75, let alone 100 years to thousands of years is like having one bad day in a year and saying your year was bad. 
I dont think inventing things counts as being smart.

Inventions always did more harm than good. 

So its not really smart, as much as it is stupid.

But if "person inventing something that harms everyone" counts as "person smart", then men were much smarter historically.

The women didnt contribute much to war inventions. Too bad, lets be sad now because of that.

This topic would not be "were nazi strongest from 1939 - 1942", because the word "historically" includes the entire history including modern history.

I can surely say that women have outplayed men in recent history to the point where I am ashamed of being a man.

So really, how does someone who is smarter and stronger loses against someone who is weak and stupid?

Answer is simple: men are not smarter.

Women have already seized full control over men.
Men are ready to die to save women.

Woman can call a man an incel, ugly or stupid, and no one will care.
Woman can hit a man, no one will care.

How many times have you heard: "women and children first".

So women come first in importance, men come second or maybe even third. 

Woman always carries less guilt than man, even when she is fully guilty.
Round 4
The fact that you're saying inventions did more harm than good shows that you aren't debating with an open mind. 

The device you're debating on is also an invention, you know. Wheels are inventions, the apartments you live in have also been designed with infrastructure using the inventions of men. I'm not saying women aren't capable of doing these things, I'm just saying they were limited, therefore they couldn't. If inventing things or discovering things isn't "smart" then what is?

You make arguments about women and children coming first, but that has nothing to do with smartness. 

The reason for that is because women create life, and are biologically weaker than men. Men have to protect children and women, which is why in dangerous situations, they are the ones being protected first. In fact, your arguments come off as women manipulating men into doing these things, which is not true and pretty sexist. You say history includes modern history, however here's a definition of "historically":

Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more



  1. with reference to past events.
    "a historically accurate picture of the time"
the keyword here is "past," not "modern." 

Anyways, good debate but I do think you could've done better. Your arguments steered off in different directions. 

Thank you for debating with me

Thank you for the debate.