>>76308387
>>76308232
This is not true.
Our entire biology evolved from social competition. Competition for mates, for resources, and for power.
There has been no group in human history where everyone is equal in power, ability, skillset, and social influence. All of these things are BIOLOGICALLY HARDWIRED into us to be sought after (salience network in the brain), and not everyone can have it.
The entire basis of sexual species lies in the evolutionary benefits of asymmetry. In species where offspring quantity is more important (like spiders and bees), the women are larger and stronger. In species where offspring quality is important (primates and humans), males are larger.
In humans, not only are males larger, but they are demonstrably more hormonally competitive. They historically competed for dominance and mates, while women were tasked with choosing and bonding with one.
This is what I mean by "human nature".
Competition and relativism IS HUMAN NATURE.
It's not a negative version of it, or a corruption of it, it simply IS what it is.
Obviously, having empathy for victims, and encouraging equality is also technically human nature since humans clearly do it, but it isn't BIOLOGICALLY what we evolved to do.
You can't run from competition. It is essential to life. There are winners and losers, especially when it comes to social dynamics and mates.
Mate guarding, neurological feedback loops, the salience network's subconscious programming, and more. All of these are HUMAN NATURE in it's most absolute form. You cannot deny competition.
Even in monogamous civil societies competition exists. Wealth, power, dominance, popularity, and strength are all still heavily desired despite every social movement in the world trying to suggest otherwise (like yours). Women are still highly selective, men are still highly competetive, Chads are still loving life and incels are still mad as shit. These will never change no matter what.
