If he wanted to score some points by using nature analogies to prove that humans Must Behave A Certain Way, there are several thousand species on the planet with more in common with us than lobsters.
Näytä tämä ketju
-
Do you think it might get you to cross someone off your "cool to have sex with" list? If so, there's some insight into one of the functions female orgasms may have served. You know, back in the days of natural living before "you must marry a man in order to eat" became a thing.
Näytä tämä ketju
Lemme tell you IME there's a pretty tight correlation btwn dudes who can't be arsed to put in 20 min of work for a female orgasm & the ones who can't be arsed to put in 20 min of chores or parenting. Ability to deliver orgasms is a fairly decent predictor of partner potential.
-
-
In species that actually use "alpha male"ness to determine who gets to reproduce, the paternal contribution is just genes. No caretaking after birth & during childhood. THESE SPECIES DON'T HAVE FEMALE ORGASMS.
Näytä tämä ketju -
Whereas in humans, partner potential has very little to do with genes. If you doubt me, google "the Hapsburgs." In that time period, paternal contribution was all about wealth.
Näytä tämä ketju -
However today's society actually has one key thing in common with early humanity prior to the very recent concept of private property: the father's personal wealth stash is not the sole/main predictor of child & maternal health & survival.
Näytä tämä ketju -
But! Partner/father support still matters a lot. Boring stuff like chores, helping kids with homework, "not being an abusive jackass who beats and/or murders family members," these all make really big differences in the life outcomes of everyone around him.
Näytä tämä ketju -
Men are VERY IMPORTANT in keeping society together. What's needed from men is really straightforward: just normal everyday having-one's-shit-together. Willingness to put in work on boring stuff that's not instantly rewarding. THAT MATTERS.
Näytä tämä ketju -
What was that one thing that's a good indicator of a man's willingness to put in work on something that's not instantly rewarding to him? That comes up early enough in the relationship to ditch him before he gets you pregnant? Oh right. The ability to meet female desire.
Näytä tämä ketju -
Taking lessons from biology is a fine idea. The way to do that is look at species close to our own, or- gasp- our own species! Then you draw conclusions from that, *casting aside preconceived notions that may be received from one's culture for reasons unrelated to biology.*
Näytä tämä ketju -
The proper scientific method approach to the incel problem would be to look at the story our own reproductive anatomy tells loud & clear, & conclude "If a man truly cannot convince any women to fuck him, there's a reason, and the women's judgment is valid."
Näytä tämä ketju -
The wrong way to take lessons from nature is to *start* with preconceived cultural notions, then look for just-so stories to justify your foregone conclusion. That's called pseudoscience.
Näytä tämä ketju -
Like. When somebody's scraping so hard they're digging into lobsters to explain human behavior, you know they're fucked. What the fuck
Näytä tämä ketju
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.