Monogamy May Be Even More Difficult For Women Than it Is For Men

[Ice That Jaw]

The best advice I can give is to marry an introvert.

 

[Greoric]

@MikeMcMann , to clarify by "reproductive constraints", I mean biological constraints, as in their 9 month pregnancy to term, and their relative scarcity in sex cells, not necessarily the social constraints. The latter is influential, but not as fundamental, as it seems @panamaican is suggesting.

 

[MikeMcMann]

The best advice I can give is to marry an introvert.

gawd no.

I mean fine if that is your thing. But if your whole goal is to solely try to find someone with little to no social skills and no desire to build them, such that you get someone unlikely to meet someone and establish a relationship where they might cheat, I would rather just stay single.

Any female I am with I want to her to be able to hold her own in a room full of everyday people or high powered executives. I want her to be a challenging successful woman and have no interest in a meek wallflower. But to each there own.

 

[Seaside]

So why claim that they were a closer family unit?

Um no?

His statement was true only during very early times.

 

[Seaside]

His statement was true only during very early times.

Also it stagnated. Eventually those populations at equator stopped increasing as much or as fast as ones above it in north.

 

[Greoric]

Also it stagnated. Eventually those populations at equator stopped increasing as much or as fast as ones above it in north.

Albeit not pre-historically, which is the time frame and scale that is most influential with regard to evolutionary pressures… not the last two thousand years.

 

[Ice That Jaw]

gawd no.

I mean fine if that is your thing. But if your whole goal is to solely try to find someone with little to no social skills and no desire to build them, such that you get someone unlikely to meet someone and establish a relationship where they might cheat, I would rather just stay single.

Any female I am with I want to her to be able to hold her own in a room full of everyday people or high powered executives. I want her to be a challenging successful woman and have no interest in a meek wallflower. But to each there own.

Oh, I want a strong, independent woman, blah, blah, blah.

 

[Seaside]

Albeit not pre-historically.

When populations in cold developed higher thinking iq. Etc. They eventually reproduced a lot more and out numbered those down below. The australian aboriginales are essentially an extinct and dead group with very low population numbers before europeans arrived. Subsaharan africa was the same except the eastern horn of africa in some parts. Also the khosians reproduced in lower jumber than bantu and were wiped out by bantu. Some of this talk gets controversial so just PM me we can continue. I dont want to distract or have someone say "racist". Because i know in most of the west now real science is shunned but thisnis not the case outside the west. We can talk about controversial stuff like races and differences and gender differences. Etc.

 

[Greoric]

When populations in cold developed higher thinking iq. Etc. They eventually reproduced a lot more and out numbered those down below. The australian aboriginales are essentially an extinct and dead group with very low population numbers before europeans arrived. Subsaharan africa was the same except the eastern horn of africa in some parts. Also the khosians reproduced in lower jumber than bantu and were wiped out by bantu. Some of this talk gets controversial so just PM me we can continue. I dont want to distract or have someone say "racist". Because i know in most of the west now real science is shunned but thisnis not the case outside the west. We can talk about controversial stuff like races and differences and gender differences. Etc.

I've already brought that issue up actually. The pop explosion as far as the time scales I'm aware of were relatively non-negligible before domestication. Interestingly, the point with regard to IQ, hasn't received as much push back on here as I anticipated.

Frankly though, I think people need to read if not be aware of the mass of literature backing up that point, given how central it is to explaining many of our current social problems. Similarly, given that this thread ultimately has its toes into evolutionary psychology, its as good an opportunity as any other.

 

[TheGreatA]

gawd no.

I mean fine if that is your thing. But if your whole goal is to solely try to find someone with little to no social skills and no desire to build them, such that you get someone unlikely to meet someone and establish a relationship where they might cheat, I would rather just stay single.

Any female I am with I want to her to be able to hold her own in a room full of everyday people or high powered executives. I want her to be a challenging successful woman and have no interest in a meek wallflower. But to each there own.

I would say that there are more types of "introverts" than just the meek wall-flowers.

Usually it mostly means that a person is more focused on the internal developments, rather than the external. The process of looking at the world, is simply different, between the two "arch-types". The so-called introvert will form their observations about the world based on rigorous self-study, introspection, while the externally aligned person will form their observations and concepts by picking up signals from other individuals (in today's times, more often than not, from social media, and so forth).

Sometimes that might not translate to being a "challenging successful woman" in today's terms, as picking up the "proper" signals, and abiding by them, has come to be extremely important in today's day and era (which hopefully will soon come to pass). But it might translate to being a person that is not merely the end result of the surrounding culture and social standards.

For those that believe the modern culture to be a degenerate influence, a partner capable of introspection, and of forming ideas independent of the surrounding circumstances, is certainly someone to look for.

The people who are content with the products of modern-day culture, ought to seek the external types.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Oh, I want a strong, independent woman, blah, blah, blah.

Is that a bad or uncommon thing or something?

 

[DIDM]

All that is correct. Women certainly want to fuck just as much as men, but they're choosier and more selective about whom they do it with. Hence why there's a very general pareto distribution in the sexual market place, where 20% of men have 80% of the sexual access to females, and why the phenomenon of incels is almost exclusively a male problem.

Isn't that right @KONG-D'SNT-TAP ?

No, you are wrong

The women that get out of the mating pool are called lesbians

Out of 1 million lesbians, how many would you like to fuck? Where strangely, gay men, tend to be what women would consider, attractive. It’s literally mind blowing

 

[Ice That Jaw]

Is that a bad or uncommon thing or something?

No, not bad, just terribly tacky. FYI, being an introvert isn't tied to public speaking.

 

[Greoric]

No, you are wrong

The women that get out of the mating pool are called lesbians

Out of 1 million lesbians, how many would you like to fuck? Where strangely, gay men, tend to be what women would consider, attractive. It’s literally mind blowing

I'm sorry, was there a rebuttal to my statements there?

 

[MikeMcMann]

I would say that there are more types of "introverts" than just the meek wall-flowers.

I think it is hard to sum up how to define an "introvert" in a few words but I am comfortable with that definition as a loose one.

Usually it mostly means that a person is more focused on the internal developments, rather than the external.

I don't think it so much tied to development as it is to social interactions.

The process of looking at the world, is simply different, between the two "arch-types". The so-called introvert will form their observations about the world based on rigorous self-study, introspection, while the externally aligned person will form their observations and concepts by picking up signals from other individuals (in today's times, more often than not, from social media, and so forth).

Again I don't agree. An extrovert can certainly use introspection and self study just as introvert can quietly observe the world and others, but it is how they interact and present themselves that determines whether they are introverted or extroverted.

Sometimes that might not translate to being a "challenging successful woman" in today's terms, as picking up the "proper" signals has come to be extremely important in today's day and era (which hopefully will soon come to pass). But it might translate to being a person that is not merely the end result of the surrounding culture and social standards.

For those that believe the modern culture to be a degenerate influence, a partner capable of introspection, and of forming ideas independent of the surrounding circumstances, is certainly someone to look for.

The people who are content with the products of modern-day culture, ought to seek the external types.

Again I do not concede that introspection is the sole domain or even more predominant in Introverts. You can have an introvert who does no introspection. Who never thinks of the broader world or their place in it. You can have an introvert who is hungry for information in all forms. And both those apply to extroverts as well. Again I do not think you can define introverts and extroverts in that way. Rather is what they do after they have gained whatever information and how they display that outwards that determines if they are introverted or extroverted.

 

[Seaside]

I've already brought that issue up actually. The pop explosion as far as the time scales I'm aware of were relatively non-negligible before domestication. Interestingly, the point with regard to IQ, hasn't received as much push back on here as I anticipated.

Frankly though, I think people need to read the mass of literature backing up that point, given how central it is to explaining many of our current social problems.

Eventually i think it will come back. The left promotes disorder chaos and self destruction but from that their worst nightmare will take advantage of the weakness to rise. They kill themselves and a new ideology takes their place. You cant win the war if you have limits and are self suiciding yourself and dont have higher purpose or a cause you die for. Essentially only the soulless and mentally ill join their leftists cause. Cant win if you dont show up in large enough numbers. Because muslims are conscious of this stuff to a degree. The koran and hadiths tell them. That isnt even mentioning. That races today derived from billion different factors.

 

[Greoric]

Eventually i think it will come back. The left promotes disorder chaos and self destruction but from that their worst nightmare will take advantage of the weakness to rise. They kill themselves and a new ideology takes their place. You cant win the war if you have limits and are self suiciding yourself and dont have higher purpose or a cause you die for. Essentially only the soulless and mentally ill join their leftists cause. Cant win if you dont show up in large enough numbers. Because muslims are conscious of this stuff to a degree. The koran and hadiths tell them. That isnt even mentioning. That races today derived from billion different factors.

On the flip side, this kind of ignorance may very well set us up for a Hegelian dialectic overreaction. I'd prefer for people to wake up to the reality now, and ease into its implications to maybe allow for and respect people's freedom of association than for political persuasions such as @Trotsky to get to far before the reaction from the right gets to be an excessively violent one.

 

[MikeMcMann]

No, not bad, just terribly tacky. FYI, being an introvert isn't tied to public speaking.

Its tacky to like strong, confident women. WTF?

And no, its not tied to public speaking. It IS tied to how you carry yourself and conduct yourself in public and in group settings with other people.

 

[TheGreatA]

I think it is hard to sum up how to define an "introvert" in a few words but I am comfortable with that definition as a loose one.

I don't think it so much tied to development as it is to social interactions.

Again I don't agree. An extrovert can certainly use introspection and self study just as introvert can quietly observe the world and others, but it is how they interact and present themselves that determines whether they are introverted or extroverted.

Again I do not concede that introspection is the sole domain or even more predominant in Introverts. You can have an introvert who does no introspection. Who never thinks of the broader world or their place in it. You can have an introvert who is hungry for information in all forms. And both those apply to extroverts as well. Again I do not think you can define introverts and extroverts in that way. Rather is what they do after they have gained whatever information and how they display that outwards that determines if they are introverted or extroverted.

An introvert that does no introspection, is kind of a contradiction. The term was invented to describe people who partake in introspection, self-reflection.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraversion_and_introversion#Introversion

If you define the terms differently, that is fine. In commonly used language, introversion has basically come to mean being on the "autist spectrum" and having no social skills. But if we are talking about the original meanings of the terms, having been created as concepts to describe how people of different personality types choose to receive and process information, and how they prefer to spend most of their mental (and physical) energy, then what I said holds true.

The terms "introvert" and "extravert" were never meant to be used as definitives. A generally more introverted person is by no means incapable of picking up social signals (unless they are mentally impaired), nor is a generally more extraverted person completely incapable of self-reflection (unless they are a total narcissist/psychopath). Both sides can and will manifest in a person, but one side is usually dominant, thus the categorizing of people into extraverts or introverts.

It's safe to say that an "introverted" person would be less impacted by surrounding culture, as their observations would be more likely to have been formed independently, through introspection, rather than collectively, by picking up social signals.

 

[Greoric]

Its tacky to like strong, confident women. WTF?

And no, its not tied to public speaking. It IS tied to how you carry yourself and conduct yourself in public and in group settings with other people.

I legit LOLed at the first comment.

If I can jump in here with an alternative description of that continuum, it seems to be less of a descriptor on how you are in public as much as how much work it feels like for people to be in public. The best way, I've read that makes the most sense for introversion and extroversion, is whether being in social situations is draining or not. If someone is "recharged" by being by themselves or with a few people very close to them then they could be described as introverts. That's as compared to people that feel "recharged" when they're among people constantly. The counter intuitive part is that you could have an introvert that especially talkative in social situations, but its just not very sustainable because they feel like they're giving out their energy. (I'm actually one of those people and scored pretty highly on the introversion scale on a Meyers Briggs personality test).

In short it seems like introversion and extroversion has more to do with your state of preference in social setting as opposed to a degree of social awkwardness.