- Messages
- 916
It makes more sense to have evolutionary pressure on males, because we're the ones who can actually be tested more, due to our sex role that gives us a burden of performance. A chick doesn't have to prevail in battle or prove her ability to make a bunch of money in order to land a mate, because it's her role to stay safely at home and take care of kids. If she were good in battle, it might actually be detrimental because it could interfere with her father's or husband's ability to dominate her, and it might diminish her femininity by making her more dominant. It would be harder for her to find a mate who's more masculine if she's being tested on the battlefield to see if she can defeat men.
Females are supposed to compete to be the most submissive and feminine; the girliest wins. But girliness requires totally different qualities than what a man needs to survive. A chick needs to show that she'll be sexually satisfying (i.e. as cute and subby as possible). Cuteness means she's silly and helpless like a little girl. Think, for example, of the pubescent Nancy Bowden (played by Lori Martin) in the 1962 Cape Fear and how helpless she was against that big brute. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055824/characters/nm0552700
A chick like that has to do everything she can to please her father or husband so that she'll be protected and taken care of; all she's capable of doing in a situation where she's being attacked is scream and try to run away. Therefore she has to be as cute and subby as possible to seem useful and desirable to her protector and inspire these protective impulses on his part.
The female doesn't even have to be mentally stable because if she gets out of line, her husband can just smack her and tell her that she'll get worse if she doesn't obey. She knows she has to behave in a pleasing way so that he'll do anything she asks (kind of like a little girl will get her dad to spoil her by being aesthetically pleasing, by seeming as cute, basically kawaii, as possible.
In short, the female doesn't need to be a complete person; she can be so weak in a lot of areas that if put on a desert island by herself, or with a bunch of similar chicks, maybe she couldn't survive; but it doesn't matter because she should always have men to take care of her. Maybe someday she'll have a husband who will tell her after a hard day at work about his struggles, and she'll act sympathetic and say, "Don't worry, honey, you're so smart, you can do anything" and rub his feet and give him a nice blowjob, etc.
That really doesn't take a lot of discipline or strength like what a man would need to survive, since she just needs to accept his instruction on how to please him; if it takes any brains, it's just in coming up with new ways to please him and taking note of what he seems to like or dislike and adjusting her approach accordingly. Ideally what you want is a female who is smart enough to learn the basics of the kind of work you do, such that you can hold a conversation with her (which is mostly one-sided, because all she's saying is how happy she is to hear of your successes, or how she's sorry to hear of your struggles); but is too lazy to actually apply herself to do that kind of work herself (she's rather be just sucking your dick and cleaning the house and taking care of the kids as a way of getting by in life).
It's true that she's not really being tested to see if she could have sons who are competent to do what they need to do in the world, but oh well; we need to preserve some sexual dimorphism and complementary sex roles to have a smoothly-running society. Perhaps the fact that chicks only need to be superficially competent at anything besides housework and child-rearing is why there are so many men in our society who aren't competent at much either. That could also be, though, because chicks are just choosing good-looking losers to have kids with these days.
And that's a problem too -- if you change the methods of sexual selection such that there's more evolutionary pressure on chicks than men, compared to how it was before, then now you'll have more men who are losers getting to mate and reproduce. It's probably better to just stick with a state of affairs where women are tested on how good they are at being women, and men are tested at how good they are at being men.
There are some traits we don't actually want the other sex to have; e.g. we wouldn't necessarily want most men to be as manipulative as women. Female manipulative tendencies are supposed to be so that they can always be understanding how we tick and knowing what buttons to push to please us and get stuff out of us and avoid getting the shit beat out of them.
If men get good at that stuff, though, then they basically become like Jews; a Jew is basically like a woman except lacking in a pussy and therefore useless, because all they do is manipulate all day without contributing even a vagina for us to enjoy, which makes them merely parasites. Their version of "cuteness" is that they can use their verbal IQ to think of some superficially clever stuff, but it's mostly bullshit that we could do without.
And if women got to be self-reliant like men, then they would start relying on themselves more and be distracted from trying to please us so they could get us to provide for and protect them. Plus they would start to feel superior to us, probably, based on, e.g., their being more cautious and less risk-taking than men (the burden falls on men to be aggressive and inquisitive even in ways that seem less immediately "practical"; women have little patience with this kind of stuff because they just want a guy to pay for nice things for them to enjoy, which requires more immediate success on the part of the man).
Women also think men are stupid if they don't share their same ability and willingness to manipulate; e.g. a chick will cheat on tests at school and think she's smart for doing that, and that men are dumb for letting her get away with it, while a man might actually have some moral principles and integrity and put value in actually learning the material and getting a good grade the honest way. It makes sense that women would be this way, because in their world, if the man they're supposed to serve thinks everything is okay with her performance as a woman, then for practical purposes, it is; they don't have to directly face the same brutal struggle for survival, against merciless and inflexible laws of nature, that men do. Basically when men pray to a God, they're being like a woman who is asking her man to bend the rules for her.
Females are supposed to compete to be the most submissive and feminine; the girliest wins. But girliness requires totally different qualities than what a man needs to survive. A chick needs to show that she'll be sexually satisfying (i.e. as cute and subby as possible). Cuteness means she's silly and helpless like a little girl. Think, for example, of the pubescent Nancy Bowden (played by Lori Martin) in the 1962 Cape Fear and how helpless she was against that big brute. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055824/characters/nm0552700
A chick like that has to do everything she can to please her father or husband so that she'll be protected and taken care of; all she's capable of doing in a situation where she's being attacked is scream and try to run away. Therefore she has to be as cute and subby as possible to seem useful and desirable to her protector and inspire these protective impulses on his part.
The female doesn't even have to be mentally stable because if she gets out of line, her husband can just smack her and tell her that she'll get worse if she doesn't obey. She knows she has to behave in a pleasing way so that he'll do anything she asks (kind of like a little girl will get her dad to spoil her by being aesthetically pleasing, by seeming as cute, basically kawaii, as possible.
In short, the female doesn't need to be a complete person; she can be so weak in a lot of areas that if put on a desert island by herself, or with a bunch of similar chicks, maybe she couldn't survive; but it doesn't matter because she should always have men to take care of her. Maybe someday she'll have a husband who will tell her after a hard day at work about his struggles, and she'll act sympathetic and say, "Don't worry, honey, you're so smart, you can do anything" and rub his feet and give him a nice blowjob, etc.
That really doesn't take a lot of discipline or strength like what a man would need to survive, since she just needs to accept his instruction on how to please him; if it takes any brains, it's just in coming up with new ways to please him and taking note of what he seems to like or dislike and adjusting her approach accordingly. Ideally what you want is a female who is smart enough to learn the basics of the kind of work you do, such that you can hold a conversation with her (which is mostly one-sided, because all she's saying is how happy she is to hear of your successes, or how she's sorry to hear of your struggles); but is too lazy to actually apply herself to do that kind of work herself (she's rather be just sucking your dick and cleaning the house and taking care of the kids as a way of getting by in life).
It's true that she's not really being tested to see if she could have sons who are competent to do what they need to do in the world, but oh well; we need to preserve some sexual dimorphism and complementary sex roles to have a smoothly-running society. Perhaps the fact that chicks only need to be superficially competent at anything besides housework and child-rearing is why there are so many men in our society who aren't competent at much either. That could also be, though, because chicks are just choosing good-looking losers to have kids with these days.
And that's a problem too -- if you change the methods of sexual selection such that there's more evolutionary pressure on chicks than men, compared to how it was before, then now you'll have more men who are losers getting to mate and reproduce. It's probably better to just stick with a state of affairs where women are tested on how good they are at being women, and men are tested at how good they are at being men.
There are some traits we don't actually want the other sex to have; e.g. we wouldn't necessarily want most men to be as manipulative as women. Female manipulative tendencies are supposed to be so that they can always be understanding how we tick and knowing what buttons to push to please us and get stuff out of us and avoid getting the shit beat out of them.
If men get good at that stuff, though, then they basically become like Jews; a Jew is basically like a woman except lacking in a pussy and therefore useless, because all they do is manipulate all day without contributing even a vagina for us to enjoy, which makes them merely parasites. Their version of "cuteness" is that they can use their verbal IQ to think of some superficially clever stuff, but it's mostly bullshit that we could do without.
And if women got to be self-reliant like men, then they would start relying on themselves more and be distracted from trying to please us so they could get us to provide for and protect them. Plus they would start to feel superior to us, probably, based on, e.g., their being more cautious and less risk-taking than men (the burden falls on men to be aggressive and inquisitive even in ways that seem less immediately "practical"; women have little patience with this kind of stuff because they just want a guy to pay for nice things for them to enjoy, which requires more immediate success on the part of the man).
Women also think men are stupid if they don't share their same ability and willingness to manipulate; e.g. a chick will cheat on tests at school and think she's smart for doing that, and that men are dumb for letting her get away with it, while a man might actually have some moral principles and integrity and put value in actually learning the material and getting a good grade the honest way. It makes sense that women would be this way, because in their world, if the man they're supposed to serve thinks everything is okay with her performance as a woman, then for practical purposes, it is; they don't have to directly face the same brutal struggle for survival, against merciless and inflexible laws of nature, that men do. Basically when men pray to a God, they're being like a woman who is asking her man to bend the rules for her.
Last edited:
