Discussion Sexual selection makes no damn evolutionary sense.

[BlackPill Scholar]

I literally said why, men were killed off and superior males took harems for themselves, there was no reason for women to choose to get the same end result you speak of



That has nothing to do with women being the selectors, it has to do with men being the "disposable sex"



No, again women did not need to select, the men merely needed to be in fear of a superior male or killed off

CAN ONE OF YOU PLEASE TELL ME WHAT BETA MALES WERE DOING THE ENTIRE TIME

THEY WEREN'T RAPING?
THEY WEREN'T KILLING?

SO WHAT WERE THEY DOING?

You guys are literally speaking like they were neutered like men today via "laws" and couldn't just go out and steal a bitch and leave their community, there was no "amber alert" in the past, not "kidnapping notifications" either, now "news", no "rape laws" (though I'm sure they'd face punishment in the community BUT ONLY IF CAUGHT), also THERE WAS NO BIRTH CONTROL OR ABORTIONS (so a woman impregnated via rape WOULD LIKELY CARRY THE PREGNANCY TO TERM)



Yes, that is exactly what happened, women take what they can get but they always want better



You are using circular logic, how the hell do you know it wasn't that FEMALE TRAIT PREFERENCES EVOLVED AROUND MALE SELECTION

You are presupposing its MALE TRAITS THAT EVOLVED AROUND FEMALE SELECTION

Which makes no sense, because if men are bigger and stronger, and there was no "consensual norms" THEN WOMEN WOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED TO SELECT ANYTHING (How can you not understand something that simple, its SELF EVIDENT)

Since taller stronger males claimed women, they evolved to be attracted to those males, because the women who resisted less and let those males have sex with them, survived and had stronger offspring

The majority of women have rape fetishes and they often experience arousal during rape (forced copulation), YOU DON'T THINK THERE IS A REASON FOR THAT?



Why do women initiate physical violence more than men (statistically) even though they are the weaker sex?

Why are women the cause of the majority of infanticide and child murders if they are the "caretaker sex" equipped to breast feed?

Etc, etc, etc

Are you forgetting that women's hormonal makeup and volatility makes them irrational?

It can more easily be argued that they select for the traits that they were forced to accept for years and years than they were somehow selecting all this time despite ANY MAN just being able to overpower ANY WOMAN

At the end of the day, there is no way to logically argue that all the men who didn't get to breed, just stood around with their dick in their hand, and didn't rebel, rape, murder, etc AS IF LAWS AND POLICE OFFICERS EXISTED (it literally makes no sense to argue that women did the selecting, these men that didn't reproduce WERE KILLED OFF)

You don't get the point. Female chimpanzees have no preferences because there is no need to have them. The weaker male chimps are weeded out of the population via stronger male chimps. We are two separate species. In humans the selection revolves around female choice. If we had a system akin to chimps, females would develop no preferences for certain traits, because they had no chance to select. I don't see how that is circular logic. If you have no chance to exert selective choice, you don't develop selective choice.

Human evolutionary history is complex, if what you are suggesting is true, why don't all male animals just go around raping the females. Why do certain animals produce elaborate dances to attract females? Why does the peacock develop such elaborate feathers to attract mates? Do those feathers help them ward off other males?

The reason I abide by this theory of sexual selection, opposed to yours, is that this explains all phenomena of human anatomy, that cannot be explained by natural selection. Does the size of the phallus help males fight each other?

Perhaps an ESS developed in the human population of an ideal ratio of rapers:honest providers.

Either of us could be right about this, I don't think enough knowledge of prehistoric environments is known to say which of us is in the wrong. Or maybe we are both right, with some level of selection being brought by deadly male competition and another by female choice.

 

[BlkPillPres]

Either of us could be right about this

I'll agree to that when you can tell me why the "beta males" in times without police, law and order, rape laws, etc just sat around doing nothing and letting themselves be rejected by the gene pool, not one of you has a rational argument for that, and that's because THAT'S OBVIOUSLY NOT WHAT HAPPENED

You guys are basically arguing the "muh queens" meme and you don't even realize it , women had NO POWER to stop ANY MAN from forcing himself on her and NO PROTECTION EITHER

None of the points you have even matter if you can't explain this point

Dude WOMEN STILL GET RAPED AND CARRY THOSE BABIES TO TERM IN THESE TIMES (very very few, but it happens), are you saying they had more choice IN THE PAST BEFORE BIRTH CONTROL AND ABORTIONS?

Human evolutionary history is complex, if what you are suggesting is true, why don't all male animals just go around raping the females. Why do certain animals produce elaborate dances to attract females? Why does the peacock develop such elaborate feathers to attract mates? Do those feathers help them ward off other males?

Because they aren't as intelligent as us, its really that simple, this isn't complex at all, the more intelligent the animal the more it circumvents its own biology and natures rules, for example dolphins rape and these animals are said to be able to recognize themselves in a mirror, which means they have a great sense of self, monkey however get startled by their own reflection and even attack it because they can't tell (at first)

 

[BlackPill Scholar]

I'll agree to that when you can tell me why the "beta males" in times without police, law and order, rape laws, etc just sat around doing nothing and letting themselves be rejected by the gene pool, not one of you has a rational argument for that, and that's because THAT'S OBVIOUSLY NOT WHAT HAPPENED

You guys are basically arguing the "muh queens" meme and you don't even realize it , women had NO POWER to stop ANY MAN from forcing himself on her and NO PROTECTION EITHER

None of the points you have even matter if you can't explain this point

Dude WOMEN STILL GET RAPED AND CARRY THOSE BABIES TO TERM IN THESE TIMES (very very few, but it happens), are you saying they had more choice IN THE PAST BEFORE BIRTH CONTROL AND ABORTIONS?)


Because they aren't as intelligent as us, its really that simple, this isn't complex at all, the more intelligent the animal the more it circumvents its own biology and natures rules, for example dolphins rape and these animals are said to be able to recognize themselves in a mirror, which means they have a great sense of self, monkey however get startled by their own reflection and even attack it because they can't tell (at first)

There is an obvious contradiction in what you are saying and I honestly cannot believe you haven't realised it. Beta males weren't sitting around twiddling their thumbs, they were either (according to you) getting killed, or were prevented from raping by the stronger males. And your entire argument crumbles to dust.

 

[BlkPillPres]

they were either (according to you) getting killed, or were prevented from raping by the stronger males. And your entire argument crumbles to dust.

How is that a contradiction?, I literally said it makes more sense that they were being killed off rather than they were just existing and accepting women's rejections

Are you even reading what I'm saying?

 

[BlackPill Scholar]

How is that a contradiction?, I literally said it makes more sense that they were being killed off rather than they were just existing and accepting women's rejections

Are you even reading what I'm saying?

I think you were arguing against a point I wasn't making. Do either of us understand what the other is saying?

I'll agree to that when you can tell me why the "beta males" in times without police, law and order, rape laws, etc just sat around doing nothing and letting themselves be rejected by the gene pool, not one of you has a rational argument for that, and that's because THAT'S OBVIOUSLY NOT WHAT HAPPENED

You guys are basically arguing the "muh queens" meme and you don't even realize it , women had NO POWER to stop ANY MAN from forcing himself on her and NO PROTECTION EITHER

None of the points you have even matter if you can't explain this point

Dude WOMEN STILL GET RAPED AND CARRY THOSE BABIES TO TERM IN THESE TIMES (very very few, but it happens), are you saying they had more choice IN THE PAST BEFORE BIRTH CONTROL AND ABORTIONS?

Sorry, I thought you were referencing something else. I don't really have an answer for this, but by the same token, you have not provided an answer for exaggerated male ornimentation (even in humans), that doesn't serve a physical purpose relating to fighting ability.

Human social groups, perhaps serial monogamy, there are other counters against male exploitation.

I think you were arguing against a point I wasn't making. Do either of us understand what the other is saying?

Sorry, I thought you were referencing something else. I don't really have an answer for this, but by the same token, you have not provided an answer for exaggerated male ornimentation (even in humans), that doesn't serve a physical purpose relating to fighting ability.

Human social groups, perhaps serial monogamy, there are other counters against male exploitation.

*ornamentation