🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 13:24:49 UTC No. 16583597
Why are human males so dumb and violent?
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 13:34:26 UTC No. 16583608
>>16583597
Slaves --- Pocket Pussies --- World Builders
Hope this helps
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 13:37:38 UTC No. 16583613
>>16583597
nice bait
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 15:01:30 UTC No. 16583684
>>16583597
Men's IQ distribution has more variance (more retards, more geniuses), most likely for evolutionary reasons.
Females are the bottleneck for offspring production, which makes them less expendable than males are, and their reproductive systems are larger and much more demanding. This in turns means women are ill suited to physically demanding tasks and taking risks in general, and much more suited to taking care of the offspring in a safe environment created by the more expendable male. This requires that females pass a certain intelligence threshold (can't be retarded or baby is not taken care of and dies), but there's no selection pressure for having an above average IQ.
Men on the other hand are expendable and thus evolved to be much more suited for physical tasks and prone to risky behavior, including violence. Females are the sexual selectors, and so males face higher selection pressure to compete for females. It's not enough for a male to meet a baseline like it for a female, they need to be comparatively better than their peers. This leads to greater variability, including intelligence.
From a genetic perspective, it is possible that intelligence variance is strongly linked to genes found on the X chromosome. Males only get one copy of the X, which means that recessive traits (very high/low IQ) will be expressed everytime, leading to greater variance. Women get two, which means both recessive alleles must be present to express the trait, which means intelligence is more likely to be average. Y could also be a strong modifier. That said these are merely a hypotheses.
you're a faggot btw
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 15:32:00 UTC No. 16583696
>>16583597
Bait thread garbage
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 15:47:11 UTC No. 16583711
>>16583597
...Do you people never shut up?
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 20:25:28 UTC No. 16583953
>>16583684
female don't sexually select anything
in nature they have no choice
they are cogenitors
why do you think men are so visually perceptive, sexual and objective in rating people's attractiveness?
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 08:07:54 UTC No. 16584432
>>16583953
>in nature they have no choice
Partner selection is one of their main defenses against unwanted mating. You don't get to rape when the stronger male she selected is protecting her. In the event of rape, she can choose to abandon the offspring, or the stronger male she selected can choose to kill it. Many animals do this.
>but the stronger male can rape her
It's not exactly rape if he is selected or would have been selected anyways. Women have rape fantasies all the time, but they don't fantasize about being raped by an ugly frustrated loser.
>why do you think men are so visually perceptive
Because female fertility is closely tied to physical traits, much closer than male looks are to their ability to provide resources. Things are rarely absolute in evolution, successful males get to have some degree of selection as well, but it's much less than females. Even the least valueable and successful female can select from the bottom of the barrel, the most unsuccessful males can't.
>sexual
Males can inseminate multiple partners with little investment, unlike females. They're also not limited by any cycles. Females have a very high libido when ovulating, often higher than male's.
>objective
Meaningless term.
>they are cogenitors
Both sexes are cogenitors.
>pic
Not what the study is about at all.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articl
>Consistently over time, polygenic scores that predict higher earnings, education and health also predict lower fertility. Selection effects are concentrated among lower SES groups, younger parents, people with more lifetime sexual partners, and people not living with a partner. The direction of natural selection is reversed among older parents, or after controlling for age at first live birth. These patterns are in line with the economic theory of fertility, in which earnings-increasing human capital may either increase or decrease fertility via income and substitution effects in the labour market.
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 11:27:03 UTC No. 16584595
>>16583597
>Why are human males so dumb and violent?
>Shows graph where the mean IQ's of both bell curves are equivalent
?
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 11:34:39 UTC No. 16584607
>>16583597
Because human females are "intelligent" and shitheads.
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 19:20:41 UTC No. 16585004
>>16584432
your point is moot - the studies scenario is the scenario of every female being maximally protected (police squads, justice system, metoo, etc.) and able to choose freely within their dating pools
the net effect on the gene pool is negative
>when the stronger male she selected is protecting her
that's not female choice either and clearly demonstrates a positive eugenic effect caused by men, which is absent in today's environment as proven by the data
you are just validating my point
>but the stronger male can rape her
>It's not exactly rape if he is selected or would have been selected anyways.
if the girl doesn't consent it is rape retard
>Women have rape fantasies all the time, but they don't fantasize about being raped by an ugly frustrated loser.
ok bro who knew people's fantasies tend to be positive
anyways your idea is that men aren't eugenic selectors even though they end up making all the decisions
you say that it's the women because whatever guy they end up with is the "selected" one and if the "selected" one rapes that woman it's actually not rape
>Because female fertility is closely tied to physical traits
and men's ability to provide is closely tied to physical traits, which is what is important for reproduction to be successful
the point is that women have a distorted social perception of physical attractiveness as compared to men, and this is self-serving, not positively eugenic - women heavily compete with each other
you will have seen this in some dating statistic or attractiveness rating
men judge according to a normal distribution because only that allows rational decision making
>Both sexes are cogenitors.
and men are eugenic selectors
>Not what the study is about at all.
>wah wah you can't use the study that way!
but I can
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 20:22:02 UTC No. 16585059
If your IQ is sub 145 I question your consciousness
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 21:38:34 UTC No. 16585120
>>16583597
cuz it makes pussies wet
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 14:57:48 UTC No. 16586714
>>16583684
How is this any different than human race being nothing but animals?
I dont know if others have this yearning but i do have a yearning for having a mate that i love and loves me and who is loyal and i am loyal to them. Then we can raise kids in peace and happiness and raise them properly.
This outlook reduces men to animals and whoever is the biggest asshole gets to procreate and bring more little pieces of shit in the world.
Surely men are more than animals, they have in them spirit which appreciates beauty, love, God, higher values and to negate that from a man means that you delete man's purpose, meaning and spirit
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 15:07:16 UTC No. 16586726
>>16583953
kys retard
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 15:18:51 UTC No. 16586744
>>16586714
>How is this any different than human race being nothing but animals?
We are animals, and humans are a species, not a race.
>I dont know if others have this yearning
They do.
>but i do have a yearning for having a mate that i love and loves me
The need to provide and be provided for have evolutionary reasons, as explained.
>who is loyal and i am loyal to them
This is even more obviously evolutionary, of course you want your mate to be loyal, why would you want to spend resources taking care of offspring that is potentially not yours?
>This outlook reduces men to animals
There's nothing to be reduced to, we belong to Kingdom Animalia by definition.
>whoever is the biggest asshole gets to procreate
This isn't accurate. Males don't have to be assholes, they need to be able to provide and protect. Capability to provide and protect is correlated with being an asshole because you can't be an asshole if you are powerless, but it isn't causative. The "nice guy" archetype that women don't care for isn't a nice guy because he chooses not to exercise his power to harm others, but because he has no power to harm other to begin with. You're not nice for not beating up someone who you couldn't beat up. Powerful can, but don't have to be assholes. Powerless men can't be assholes, at least not in any serious capacity. You can be a nice or rude loser, women won't be particularly interested regardless.
>Surely men are more than animals, they have in them spirit which appreciates beauty, love, God
There are evolutionary reasons for appreciation of these. We covered love already more or less. Beauty is merely a sign of desirable qualities, such as fertility, health, good genes, status, safety, resources. Shared values can also be used for social bonding.
There are many evolutionary theories that deal with belief in a higher power, such as hyperactive agency detection device.
1/2
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 15:21:17 UTC No. 16586749
>>16586714
>>16586744
You seem to be under the impression that our ability to reason should somehow override instincts, but it's evident it simply modifies and refines instinctive responses.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 15:48:06 UTC No. 16586791
>>16586744
It is merely a proposition that we are animals. You may be an animal, i am not.
If they have that yearning, why dont they act on it?
Why does everything have to revolve around providing? Providing is one small aspect of what it takes for a sucessful relationship. Overestimating its importance is what got us in this terrible situation that is today's dating.
>more peterson yabbering
The guy is a populist and shabbos goyim, he sure as fuck can't talk shit about his owners therefore he is ultimately powerless
The problem with this outlook is that that means that however much power and fear of your power you instill in others, the more you'll be respected. Sounds like some scenario from the depths of Africa's jungle. Those others will only resent you and want to take you down, there wont be any real respect, only fear.
Also, can't believe the only beauty you can think of is young female's body, there are many other beautiful things like poetry, classical music, paintings, plays from sports, architecture and many others.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 16:08:09 UTC No. 16586807
>>16586791
>It is merely a proposition that we are animals.
No, it is an objective fact, unless your'e using some homebrewed definiton of an animal, but then it's an issue of semantics and we're arguing past each other. Use commonly understood terms when interacting with other humans.
>You may be an animal, i am not.
You're a multicellular, eukaryotic, heterotrophic organism that lacks cell walls and has been capable of locomotion on at least one of its developmental stages. You're an animal. Get over it.
> Providing is one small aspect of what it takes for a sucessful relationship.
You're in a postion to say this because you're male. We don't value being provided for like females do. There's an old, fat, ugly, infertile, cheating, HIC positive single mother female out there thinking there's much more to a relationship than that, too. She's all yours dude.
>Overestimating its importance is what got us in this terrible situation that is today's dating
What made the situation worse for males is that the internet gave females a much wider selection and the ability to evaluate better. Thinking didn't change much at all.
>more peterson yabbering
Don't care about him and don't watch his stuff, but I know he's a psychologist so it stands to reason that he has an understanding of evolutionary psychology.
>The problem with this outlook is that that means that however much power and fear of your power you instill in others, the more you'll be respected.
You don't have to be feared, but yes, power equals respect in most cases. We respect extraodrinary people. We respect people who can do what we cannot. This doesn't have to be a negative.
1/2
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 16:14:49 UTC No. 16586813
>>16586791
>>16586807
>Also, can't believe the only beauty you can think of is young female's body
That's on you actually, i distinctly went out of my way to list some qualities that are not limited to mates.
>poetry
Social bonding, pattern recognition, empathy
>classical music
Social bonding, pre-verbal communication, mate selection (no shortage of animals that select based on singing ability), pattern recognition, empathy
>paintings
Social bonding, pre-verbal communication, pattern recognition, empathy, appreciation of certain colors/shapes might have had an evolutionary basis in helping humans recognize things that are beneficial for survival, such as brigthly colored, round fruit
>plays from sports
Social bonding, direct demonstration of physical fitness
>architecture
Pattern recognition
>and many others
And many more evolutionary reasons to appreciate anything we appreciate.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 16:21:28 UTC No. 16586816
>>16586807
This is what overdeveloped phd riddled solely scientific brain does to your thinking. Brain without mind, heart and spirit.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 16:24:52 UTC No. 16586819
>>16586816
I don't have a phd. This is high school, maybe undergrad biology.
>Brain without mind, heart and spirit
Understanding phenomena doesn't make you appreciate them less, if anything it makes you appreciate them more. You're not any better off thinking your TV is a magic box with a small person inside of it because you don't understand electricity and cinematography.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 16:36:35 UTC No. 16586833
>>16586819
but you might be better off by not reducing everything to biologic "facts", starting with the greeks and going up from there, maybe reading a book thats not a textbook.
Theres so much more to life than the hollow life that science portrays. Also maybe thinking for yourself would help in this case and not repeating stuff that you've read somewhere.
Imma head out back to /lit/, maybe some aren't meant to find out about stuff that really make the life worth living
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 16:43:44 UTC No. 16586839
>>16586833
I understand your point, learning more about the underlying mechanisms of life and behavior can cause an existential crisis, but it doesn't have to. At the end of the day life is as it always was regardless of your understanding of it, but a better understanding can help with achieving your goals, or reevaluating them. Things don't lose their value because you understand the underlying causes. Beauty is still beauty even if it's rooted in what was beneficial for survival.
>Also maybe thinking for yourself would help in this case and not repeating stuff that you've read somewhere.
Most of this stuff is easy to confirm or apparent.
>Imma head out back to /lit/, maybe some aren't meant to find out about stuff that really make the life worth living
You won't find an objecitve worth, best you can do is find subjective worth that is either more or less informed.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 16:50:41 UTC No. 16586848
>>16583953
don't be retarded, son
pretend you're a generic rapist caveman
it's easy to rape and impregnate a woman
it's virtually impossible to force her to care for and raise your child
you would have to literally watch her 24/7 to keep her from just killing it the first chance she gets
literally just chuck it over a cliff, there go your genes
humans are too intelligent for the standard animal
>lol i got my sperm in you first now you have to birth and raise my offspring
you need to also convince her that she should spend years caring for and raising your offspring
that's where the selection part comes in
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 16:52:16 UTC No. 16586854
>>16586839
Most of this stuff is easy to see through and apparently faulty
On lit I will see truth more valuable and with more depth. Blasting an "objective" sticker on some bullshit some retards in white coats came up with doesnt make it any more true than it is( which it isnt)
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 17:16:00 UTC No. 16586877
>>16583597
Demonstrating that you're a midwit is not impressive