RageFuel Foids standards doesn't make ANY SENSE, especially from the natural perspective

[StepyAkermanskie]

Yeah I know, water is wet, but I think it's just something that we don't even discuss too often because we take it as something normal, as something that we know that was always true.

But their standards seriously are stupid. From literally all perspectives - biology, evolutionary psychology, eugenic, physical health etc.

What's the main purpose of any life? To survive and reproduce. Let's focus then on the survival aspect. In humans, to be able to survive, our ancestors had to meet some strict but practical requirements - be psyhically healthy, be at least average intelligent, be strong, have a resources, have a skill like hunting, be useful to the tribe/community etc. All of those things not only were increasing the chance to survive for a men, but also for his future kids and wife/wifes/harem/lovers etc.

So, from the natural perspective it would make a lot of sense if women were picking their sexual partners based on mostly those features, right? And that their primal instinct were telling them to look at those characteristics, right? THEN WHY THEY ARE DOING ABSOLUTELY OTHERWISE? AND WHY THEIR SUBCONSCIOUS IS NOT ONLY TELLING THEM THAT IT'S OKAY, BUT IS EVEN PUSHING THEM FURTHER FOR THIS?

Why the dating marked and your chance to succed in this is based on your facial bones structure, which have literally NOTHING to do with your chances of survival? Why the symmetry of your face is such a big deal, when it doesn't change anything in the situation like fighting with a tiger? Why very tall men are more attractive for foids, when in reality being tall means that this person needs more energy (and so eats more food) and have a harder time to survive in the face of the situation which requires for him to hide for example? Why skinny, pretty boy mogs the average gymcel, who in the fight would have a much higher chance to beat him up?

Why the dating market has becomed a literall beauty contest between men? It's just doesn't make any sense from all of the rational perspectives.

 

[KillNiggers]

Female sexual selection is just bs.

 

[Grodd]

Foids are simple minded sheep their standards are influenced by a mix of entitlement and shallowness mostly reinforced by being called pretty or some bullshit positive affection from others foids and simps which leads to them having a huge ego

 

[StepyAkermanskie]

Foids are simple minded sheep their standards are influenced by a mix of entitlement and shallowness mostly reinforced by being called pretty or some bullshit positive affection from others foids and simps which leads to them having a huge ego

Yes, also I think that the social media (and tv before) have a big impact in that, because they promote this pretty boys as a standard of beauty, and foids fall in the trap "everyone thinks that they are high SMV -> I must do that too", because they are very social and conformist creatures by the nature

 

[Todd Thundercock]

There's many things happening today societally that do not make sense, and it just so happens that all of them are against raising families.

 

[Grodd]

Yes, also I think that the social media (and tv before) have a big impact in that, because they promote this pretty boys as a standard of beauty, and foids fall in the trap "everyone thinks that they are high SMV -> I must do that too", because they are very social and conformist creatures by the nature

Yeah facts i agree

 

[StepyAkermanskie]

There's many things happening today societally that do not make sense, and it just so happens that all of them are against raising families.

Imagine explaining to your great-grandfather who was a strong soldier and fought in some war that you were not able to prolong his bloodline because you were born without a "hunter eyes" and with a smaller face bone structure than some skinny fuckboys who has taken most of the girls in your area

 

[Esoteric7]

because for thousands of years, most marriages were survival-focused - couples were role mates: the woman raised the children and the man raised the money.

now that survivability is taken for granted couples now desire to be soul mates since couples' survival needs are met, so they're “upping the ante” and redefining 'love'

 

[jackhanma]

facial bone structure indicated good health ("high testosterone features") as well as skeletal integrity for things like the skull (deep set eyes so they dont get damaged, thick eyebrows to block out the sun, strong jaw indicating meat diet etc.) whereas things like frame are more self-explanitory (broad shoulders help you throw or hit better etc.)

same reason really why we find certain features attractive in womens faces

 

[CEO of beta eyes]

because for thousands of years, most marriages were survival-focused - couples were role mates: the woman raised the children and the man raised the money.

now that survivability is taken for granted couples now desire to be soul mates since couples' survival needs are met, so they're “upping the ante” and redefining 'love'

 

[darktriadterror]

Read about fisherian runaway, it may explain it.

"Extreme and (seemingly) maladaptive sexual dimorphism represented a paradox for evolutionary biologists from Charles Darwin's time up to the modern synthesis. Darwin attempted to resolve the paradox by assuming heredity for both the preference and the ornament, and supposed an "aesthetic sense" in higher animals, leading to powerful selection of both characteristics in subsequent generations. Fisher developed the theory further by assuming genetic correlation between the preference and the ornament, that initially the ornament signalled greater potential fitness (the likelihood of leaving more descendants), so preference for the ornament had a selective advantage. Subsequently, if strong enough, female preference for exaggerated ornamentation in mate selection could be enough to undermine natural selection even when the ornament has become non-adaptive. Over subsequent generations this could lead to runaway selection by positive feedback, and the speed with which the trait and the preference increase could (until counter-selection interferes) increase exponentially."

 

[BELOW_Average_Joe]

They breed with thugs and sociopaths and wonder why the world is so fucked up

 

[Simulacrasimulation]

Yes, also I think that the social media (and tv before) have a big impact in that, because they promote this pretty boys as a standard of beauty, and foids fall in the trap "everyone thinks that they are high SMV -> I must do that too", because they are very social and conformist creatures by the nature

Yes but this is where the IQ comes into things.

A person who has IQ can think outside themselves objectively and rate THEMSELVES AS IF FROM THE OUTSIDE, AS IF THEY WERE THE ENVIRONMENT RATING THEM.

So REAL PROBLEM GROUP BECKIES EG 4-6.5S, which is a huge number of women on the bell curve of a population as its the mean, they would assess I'm for sure not Stacey, im fat or am not good looking enough to compete with her for the top men, But i can compete for the second tier men WHO HAVE IMPROVED THEMSELVES AND CAN PROVIDE A BETTER LIFE, INTERESTING LIFE, ETC FOR HER NICHE INTERESTS.

Also if women in general had IQ THEY WOULD BE THINKING IN THE TERMS OF THE OP, THEY WOULD ASSESS WAIT THERE ISNT IT UNSUSTAINABLE IF EVERY WOMEN GOES TO THE TOP 20% OF MEN AND COMPLETELY SHUNS THE REST, HOW DOES THE POPULATION MAINTAIN ITSELF NUMERICALLY, THE NUMBERS DONT ADD UP THESE TOP 20% CANT BREED ENOUGH BABIES TO SUSTAIN THE GENERAL POPULATION. IF I ACT IN THE WAY THAT THE MAJORITY ARE I AM ADDING TO THIS PROBLEM, I AM BECOME PART OF THE PROBLEM.

The answer is simple THEY SIMPLY CANT BE THINKING IN THIS WAY:
THIS IS ISNT HAPPENENING THE SECOND TIER MEN EG LOOKS 4.5-6.5 WHO ARE THE BIGGEST SELF IMPROVERS BETABUXXERS ETC ARE BEING IGNORED AND CAST ASIDE LIKE CHRISTMAS WRAPPING PAPER ON BOXING DAY, THE ABDICATION OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE GENERAL POPULATION IS EITHER NARCISSISM OR LOW IQ.

 

[I want virgin girl]

It does not make sense because they are not supposed to have standards or any choice. They are supposed to do as they are told. Never ever had any choosing power in the history of mankind and should not have one even today. When they do, they choose the worst scum, sociopaths, psychopaths brutes, or your typical criminal like Jeremy Meeks. If nobody sees anything wrong with this, then they are mentally ill or some kind of lower lifeform that is not able to connect the dots. Unfortunately, this is probably completely useless to say in a society where you can change your gender, where the worst type of behavior is rewarded with sex and intimacy, where degeneracy is cherished and normalcy criticized. At least we can see with our very own eyes that the average human being is stupid as a sack of potatoes.

 

[StepyAkermanskie]

Fisher developed the theory further by assuming genetic correlation between the preference and the ornament, that initially the ornament signalled greater potential fitness (the likelihood of leaving more descendants), so preference for the ornament had a selective advantage. Subsequently, if strong enough, female preference for exaggerated ornamentation in mate selection could be enough to undermine natural selection even when the ornament has become non-adaptive. Over subsequent generations this could lead to runaway selection by positive feedback, and the speed with which the trait and the preference increase could (until counter-selection interferes) increase exponentially."

Damn, this theory really makes sense which is scary. If the hypergamy won't be stopped then I can't imagine how weird the average men will be looking after the 200 years

 

[StepyAkermanskie]

It does not make sense because they are not supposed to have standards or any choice. They are supposed to do as they are told. Never ever had any choosing power in the history of mankind and should not have one even today. When they do, they choose the worst scum, sociopaths, psychopaths brutes, or your typical criminal like Jeremy Meeks.

 

[Buried Alive 2.0]

Based thread.

So, from the natural perspective it would make a lot of sense if women were picking their sexual partners based on mostly those features, right? And that their primal instinct were telling them to look at those characteristics, right? THEN WHY THEY ARE DOING ABSOLUTELY OTHERWISE? AND WHY THEIR SUBCONSCIOUS IS NOT ONLY TELLING THEM THAT IT'S OKAY, BUT IS EVEN PUSHING THEM FURTHER FOR THIS?

Being a foid is a human disorder. Foids' standards only make sense if you consider there a plan to drive humanity to self-extinction. Seriously, some countries are having a DECREASE of average IQ with time. Intelligence is the only thing that's made us succeed and foids are taking it away.

 

[Buried Alive 2.0]

It does not make sense because they are not supposed to have standards or any choice. They are supposed to do as they are told. Never ever had any choosing power in the history of mankind and should not have one even today. When they do, they choose the worst scum, sociopaths, psychopaths brutes, or your typical criminal like Jeremy Meeks. If nobody sees anything wrong with this, then they are mentally ill or some kind of lower lifeform that is not able to connect the dots. Unfortunately, this is probably completely useless to say in a society where you can change your gender, where the worst type of behavior is rewarded with sex and intimacy, where degeneracy is cherished and normalcy criticized. At least we can see with our very own eyes that the average human being is stupid as a sack of potatoes.

This is one the most based things I've read. It makes a LOT OF SENSE when you consider that men are much more stronger and capable than women. We've evolved this way to stop women from having standards and choice.

 

[prajeet88]

Female sexual selection is just bs.

This is what men would look like next to women if it wasn't for religion:

i.e. we'd have lots of completely pointless gimmicks.