these Victorian male doctors / authors keep on coming up with more and more obscure, ridiculous, weirdly specific, and poorly-reasoned ways for exactly how women are biologically inferior to men and it’s like. come on now Sir Benjamin Walter Puddingham III. you’re just making shit up now.
[“The trials I have yet made on the sensitivity of different persons confirms the reasonable expectation that it would on the whole be higher among the intellectually ablest.
[…] I found as a rule that men have more delicate powers of discrimination than women, and the business experience of life seems to confirm this view. The tuners of pianofortes are men, and so I understand are the tasters of tea and wine, the sorters of, wool, and the like. These latter occupations are well salaried, because it is of the first moment to the merchant that he should be rightly advised on the real value of what he is about to purchase or to sell. If the sensitivity of women were superior to that of men, the self-interest of merchants would lead to their being always employed ; but as the reverse is the case, the opposite supposition is likely to be the true one
Ladies rarely distinguish the merits of wine at the dinner-table, and though custom allows them to preside at the breakfast-table, men think them on the whole to be far from successful makers of tea and coffee.”]
“women are closer to medical idiocy than men because they uhhhh *throws dart* aren’t as good at making *spins wheel* coffee”
medusa-avenging-squad 