Thread 16760770

Why does this happen from a natural selection point of view?

Fisherian runaway selection

>>16760772
Explain in way that grog can understand

>>16760776
>women select the males that make their vagoo tingle bc there's no selective pressure on the population otherwise
>that causes the species to take on some retarded gyno-coded characteristics that actually hinder their survival and make the species go the way of the dodo

Leadership doesn't equal strength.
It's sometimes necessary but not always.

>>16760770 (OP)

Neoteny evolutionary strategy.

>>16760776

Males get to pick too. Likely, it is the product of sexual selection in human evolution for neotenous facial traits in women by men with the resulting neoteny in male faces being a "by-product" of sexual selection for neotenous female faces.

>>16760770 (OP)
Survival conditions nowadays are immensely different from survival conditions during caveman times.

>>16760770 (OP)
It doesn't.

https://youtube.com/@Tokyo_Sims_yt/shorts
How well do you think this guy would’ve done as a hunter

>>16760770 (OP)

Men wanted prettier, younger-looking ladies, and we ended up with prettier, younger-looking ladies, males as a byproduct.

Fighting isn’t everything. Imagine you were building a castle.

>>16760804
>hey frank wanna help me build a castle
>nah let that twink handle it

>>16760808
Shut up ogre

>>16760808
>grug use tree
>build big house
>house fall down
>grug no into eginering

>>16760770 (OP)
Hormonal birth control is known to cause women to prefer more feminine men.

>>16760811
>implying women are attracted to nerds
I think you’re misunderstanding op’s image

>>16760813
Women are attracted to either the top hunters or sustainability. The best hunters are rare but can sustain themselves consistently. That leaves the ones who can cultivate and sustain by other means. But honestly, nowadays, it doesn't matter. Women don't exactly need to rely on men to have sustainability, which then leaves room for making a more superficial choice in men rather than a practical one.

>>16760770 (OP)
show me 1 scenario where this happens

>>16760832
Sexual preferences can’t catch up that quickly. It doesn’t matter what the Industrial Revolution has changed

Women are lazy. They prefer to laze around all day than be a hunter's gatherer
>My feet hurt
>I feel sick
>Im hungry
>I don't want to eat that

>>16760836
Take Chinese culture for example. They created a society that was based heavily on agriculture than hunter-gathering. That doesn't mean hunter-gathering didn't exist, but within large metropolitan regions, cultivation and sustainability was the norm. Did being a farmer at this time lower your chances at reproducing over a hunter, or did women want to choose someone who could consistently provide for them? And considering their current and historical population sizes, it doesn't seem like they had any trouble in the way of reproduction.

>>16760850
Their current population is a result of mao’s policies not because the average Chinese man is some kind of stud. Inceldom is very much a problem there and there’s going to be an incoming demographic collapse very soon if you look at their last census from 2 years ago.

>>16760854
Oh I never implied that the average is a stud, just that they're good providers and providing doesn't necessarily require you to be a hunter-gatherer. And if you look at the population of China throughout all of major recorded history, their population sizes have on average been much higher than Western Europe's.

>>16760770 (OP)
humans live in groups

>>16760861
Yes Yes humans used to live in matriarchal communities where children are taken care of by everyone and mothers ran the whole thing. The nuclear family is a system birthed from capitalism used to promote the selling of houses and cars and other pieces of private property. Competition and hierarchy are byproducts of toxic masculinity culture and companies should be run as sustainable co-ops where each worker gets a stake.
You got anything else for us gimbutas?

>>16760867
You broad stroke more than I stroke myself. Ain't nothing wrong with competition, the problem is when people don't know how to lose properly, they turn to cheating, and that's what usually fucks everything up.

>>16760770 (OP)
Humans are evolved as a pack animal. While the ability of an ugly strong man to survive by himself may be greater, a handsome weak man will almost certainly perform better socially so actually have greater access to the resources in the tribe. And it's very rare that a handsome skinny guy couldn't bulk and become just as strong as the ugly guy if need be.
Then there is the fact that physical looks yell you about a million things beyond strength. They indicate genetic health. No good having the kids of the ugly strong guy if they turn out more likely to have issues.

i love that all of you are just perfectly happy to go along with the presupposition that human ancestors were all near-Hulk levels of jacked on nomadic hunter gatherer diets. very funny. keep it up.

>>16760770 (OP)

Culture has impact.

We are (fading out of) an esteem society. Respect, intelligence, creativity, good grooming, cooperativeness, agreeability, all are employable/high earning characteristics, and good to pass on.

Being a tough guy becomes favourable when times are harder and survival depends on assertiveness, strength and agression.

Right now we have glamourized cave man bullshit within entertainment (crime being cool, fighting, being dominant at any cost) so the balance is being thrown off by our own media, (even rich kids wanna present as criminals), but right now, not being a retard mouth breather is still more beneficial strategy for the time being.

>>16760932
You mean to tell me that most ancient hunter-gatherers weren't just a group of emaciated feral looking dudes that wreaked of desperation since they haven't had a nutritious meal in several days?!?!

>>16760932
Shh don’t let the chuds know they’re part of a social experiment where the purpose is to observe how they respond to fake news where the premise itself is wrong, and they didn’t disappoint

>>16760812
Women's preferences in men often change drastically when they stop or start taking birth control. This is a significant problem for couples who begin planning a child together, and suddenly the woman loses attraction.

>>16760935
>>16760770 (OP)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-domestication

The indications that the self-domestication-theory is right are convincing.

>>16760770 (OP)
Weeds out posers. Guys that are built like that should be able to just take what they want instead of asking.
This is also why women forgive them when they do, but not the guy on the right.

>>16760770 (OP)
For much of human history sexual selection was often influenced by others such as parents or social groups and this system proved quite effective. However as women gained more autonomy and choice in selecting partners certain patterns in societal growth have shifted. Over the past hundred years women’s preferences for men have evolved significantly mostly influenced by cultural changes and media they consume following the sexual revolution. In other words they just parrot whatever you show them is attractive from young age.
Also OP ancient men didn't look like roid monkeys.

>>16760770 (OP)
>natural selection
in nature she would not be the one selecting.

>>16760770 (OP)
if one man can hold you down two can rape you

>>16760770 (OP)

Universally Grog won and her first child was with Grog... but Grog was often away, fighting to defend and feed the tribe... Ultra-Beta was always there and she would fuck him on occasion when bored or lonely... thus both Grog and Ultra-Beta had children by her.

Multiple studies have found that stag beetle's horn size are inversely correlated with genital size.

>>16760770 (OP)
The guy on the right probably has access to tech and civilization(and a gun) given his clothes.
Would you rather have a TV and AC or wall painting and berry picking?

>>16761522
>Would you rather have a TV and AC or wall painting and berry picking?
The latter sounds berry nice.

I don't follow.

>>16760790
Survival conditions of caveman times in Europe is what created the femboys

>>16760770 (OP)
Its just a passing phase, only way to explain it with natural selection.

>>16760796
Interesting

>>16761443
That's because of sneaker males, a very common phenomenon in nature but one that does not exist in humans or most other large vertebrates. Sneaker males are almost a separate subsex of males that are smaller and less physically able to compete via violence so instead they develop into being more neotonous and less threatening while simultaneously more fertile, so larger males view them as less of a threat and also allowing them to sneakily impregnate females without their notice. Sneaker males usually have higher sperm count and sperm that is more potent and less likely to have deformities than dominant males, because they're primarily selecting for fertility while dominant males select for size and power.
I have heard some theories that something kinda similar exists in humans but via cucks would you believe it.

>>16760770 (OP)
birth control

>>16760770 (OP)
It's just a shit test by women, that pic is not representative of reality in any way, form, or fashion

>>16760770 (OP)
Good genetics > ooga booga even in some animals

>>16760835
Women lust over pretty boys or pretty boy criminals but never brutes or ugly men

>>16761115
>This is also why women forgive them when they do, but not the guy on the right.
Women only forgive good looking men for bad acts though