Our ancestors have always known that free sexuality would lead to a bad outcome for everyone. In our hubris, we have decided we know better and started an experiment with consequences that are beginning to show.
-
-
Of course, such brutal male selection has the consequence of high male competitiveness and violence. This is the reason for why we have evolved a sexual dimorphism between the sexes. In other species, the higher the dimorphism, the less monogamous they are.
Show this thread -
The genius of enforcing monogamy in humans led to a 1:1 pairing of the sexes, unlocking a huge amount of male resources previously spent on infighting, a civilization-building feat. Monogamy has now become optional and even disincentivized, turning back the clock.
Show this thread -
So we return to the times of 1 male for 17 females, but since we have laws against murder and rape, and because we have the state providing for single mothers, we have, in the west, nearly disabled natural selection. That leaves us with sexual selection as the distinctor.
Show this thread -
This is why the most important male traits are now largely genetic: A large skeleton (height, frame), robust/aesthetic craniofacial bones (jawline, orbital ridge, face), full hair, beard, etc. Women are basically selecting for the strongest caveman without any actual fighting.
Show this thread -
Hence the males of lower genetic value are forced to become suicidal, homosexual, transsexual, homicidal, a blue-pilled beta or a cuckold, all of which manifest in males much more often than females.
Show this thread -
Much of what we see today is an inevitability of the incentives set up the last decades. If we continue on this path, it is clear that, without rewarding the subservient male with procreation, civilization cannot be upheld and we will revert to a more primitive state of mankind.
Show this thread -
While feminism pretends to fight against male toxicity, it is actually encouraging it. After all, if given free choice, women will choose the meanest, baddest and most dominant. No wonder that 50 Shades is the book that has sold the most copies in human history.
Show this thread -
In contrast, monogamy pacifies male "toxicity" and leads, applied consequently over long periods of time, to diminished sexual dimorphism. Monogamy was actually a progressive idea. Today's "progressives" are really regressive. Big irony of our times.
Show this thread -
@Blacklabellogic My thoughts on natural vs. sexual selectionShow this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
17:1 is a lot higher than I've read before, which was closer to 2:1 or 3:1.
New conversation -
-
-
One human male used to knock up 17 women? I get that this led to conflict and complete inability to form a civilization but how did that one make manage this without being killed first?
-
Is this rhetorical, or are you making a joke?
-
I’m asking a question, did I misinterpret him? Please correct me if so
-
It's an average, so it could be a bunch of males mating with 2-3 females and a small minority that had gigantic harems (e.g. Ghengis khan). Statistics can sometimes be counterintuitive
-
In order for the median to be 2-3 the outliers would have to pulling such ridiculous numbers I don’t think it’s plausible, even if the median is 10 that’s just crazy
-
We're talking about points of time in history where hierarchies were simple and extremely centralized. So it is totally plausible that the top 1% of males were pulling ridiculous numbers.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.