Search Results
7/22/2025, 8:00:23 AM
There is a Russian anthropologist who explained sexual selection so much better. You guys know that just 200 years ago it was men who chose women right? It still echoed into our 70-90 with some quite extreme insecurities for women.
The thing is, the one who provides more value is the one who chooses and select. By default, it is women because they have wombs. Women can do everything a man can, albeit slower, but only a woman can carry a baby.
But then men invited civilisation in which their strength and organizational skills became way more vital and gave men value. Now women born in "civilisation" actually needed men to live, which afforded them to set up their own rules. This is a proportional specter. The more society is structured in a way that makes men irreplaceable the less rights can women afford and vice versa.
So for the longest time men were the sexual selectors. This is how we arrived at having extremely naturally attractive females - I mean in comparison to most other animals. Human females have boobs, waists, lighter skin and hair than their racial counterparts, they also decorate themselves extensively, they have something to flaunt. Normally all of that would be males job.
BUT now we get into modernity and guess what - the average man simply has nothing to offer women anymore because every edge men had over women naturally has been made irrelevant by automation. So they have to become the flamboyant flaunting sex once again,to desperately pry at every chance for a female to notice them. Our lower than average (historically) birthrates are caused by the fact that men are yet to adapt to new reality in which it is not labor that's needed but just auxiliary showing-off skills. In a way women haven't fully adapted either. In any case it's called a social lag, and whenever a new idea is introduced it takes on average two generations for it to root.
The thing is, the one who provides more value is the one who chooses and select. By default, it is women because they have wombs. Women can do everything a man can, albeit slower, but only a woman can carry a baby.
But then men invited civilisation in which their strength and organizational skills became way more vital and gave men value. Now women born in "civilisation" actually needed men to live, which afforded them to set up their own rules. This is a proportional specter. The more society is structured in a way that makes men irreplaceable the less rights can women afford and vice versa.
So for the longest time men were the sexual selectors. This is how we arrived at having extremely naturally attractive females - I mean in comparison to most other animals. Human females have boobs, waists, lighter skin and hair than their racial counterparts, they also decorate themselves extensively, they have something to flaunt. Normally all of that would be males job.
BUT now we get into modernity and guess what - the average man simply has nothing to offer women anymore because every edge men had over women naturally has been made irrelevant by automation. So they have to become the flamboyant flaunting sex once again,to desperately pry at every chance for a female to notice them. Our lower than average (historically) birthrates are caused by the fact that men are yet to adapt to new reality in which it is not labor that's needed but just auxiliary showing-off skills. In a way women haven't fully adapted either. In any case it's called a social lag, and whenever a new idea is introduced it takes on average two generations for it to root.
Page 1