Evopsych doesn't make sense, I think women are naturally designed to be more promiscuous than men

[AlexAP]

Just think about it: What would be the sexual strategies for men and women? Evopsych says for men it's to get the most women pregnant possible, for women it's to get the best man to make her pregnant because pregnancy has more costs for her. But that does make only sense if men don't want to provide for their offspring, because if men would get literally 600 women pregnant, they would not be capable to provide for all of them or even spend time with them.

The reality is: Men usually want to provide for their offspring. However, it's true at the same time that men are naturally wired to like to sleep with multiple women. But the reason might be two different strategies, both for men and women.
----> (1) Creating offspring: Get many women pregnant (men) / Get pregnant (women)
----> (2) Caring for offspring: Being a present father to your child (men) / being a present mother to your child (women)

Here now the brutal reality:
(1)
----> If men want to get many women pregnant, the best strategy is to sleep with as many women as possible.
----> If women want to get pregnant, the best strategy is to sleep with as many men as possible.

There is no difference here! Both men and women should logically have the same strategy to maximize the chance for offspring: Sleeping with multiple people from the opposite sex. Women for example could reduce the risk of choosing an infertile man by sleeping with many men, one of them will surely get her pregnant.

(2)
----> If a man wants to be a present father to his child, **the only strategy** (!) is to sleep consistently with only one woman who doesn't sleep with others (monogamy) to ensure that her offspring is yours.
----> If a woman wants to be a present mother to her child, **she still can sleep with many men** (!), because she will always know that her child will be hers and there's no DNA test in nature, so no men will know whether she cheated or not.

This shows that women have less incentives for monogamy than men. They don't need it to ensure their parenthood, only men would need to sleep consitently with one woman to be sure that they're the father.

TL;DR: Women are naturally designed to be more promiscuous than men, as they don't need to sleep with only one man to ensure that their offspring is theirs; meanwhile men who want to provide for a child need a monogamous relationship to be sure of their paternity.

 

[Deleted member 25059]

 

[It'snotover]

If women want to get pregnant, the best strategy is to sleep with as many men as possible.

I feel like that would be bad from an evolutionary standpoint for women, they are wired to get the best genes, why should they fuck 10 normies trying to getting pregnant when she can fuck 20 times a chad getting the best genes?

 

[AlexAP]

I feel like that would be bad from an evolutionary standpoint for women, they are wired to get the best genes, why should they fuck 10 normies trying to getting pregnant when she can fuck 20 times a chad getting the best genes?

She can fuck 5 Chads, 5 HTN/Chadlites, 5 Normies and make genetic recombination do the best of it, no reason to get only one Chad.

 

[Primalsplit]

I think you are very correct. One important thing however, no man or woman have the exact same exact strategy printed in their DNAs. One shouldn't generalize every man and woman as the same in their gender. Some men will be more akin to spread their gene(not necessarily alpha) and some more akin to invest(not necessarily beta).

 

[Primalsplit]

I feel like that would be bad from an evolutionary standpoint for women, they are wired to get the best genes, why should they fuck 10 normies trying to getting pregnant when she can fuck 20 times a chad getting the best genes?

Have you read the sperm wars?

 

[It'snotover]

Have you read the sperm wars?

Nope, what is it?

 

[Primalsplit]

Nope, what is it?

Well, it's a book. I think you might find it very interesting.

 

[AlexAP]

@Reckless Turtle Thoughts?

 

[Reckless Turtle]

Male refractory period: 6 to 72 hours
Female refractory period: 9 months

This, alone, discredits the entire basis of your thread.

Females can just use their eyes to weed out the best sperm source without actually needing to undergo "sperm wars." The concept of a "sperm war" mostly applies to gang rape scenarios (not extremely uncommon in a primitive context, but still not common).

Females can also be promiscuous to extract survival benefits from various betabuxes (while they aren't fertile, preferably).

 

[Reckless Turtle]

If women want to get pregnant, the best strategy is to sleep with as many men as possible.

Except that the female biological imperative isn't simply to get pregnant—it's to get pregnant with the best available genetic code.

 

[AlexAP]

Male refractory period: 6 to 72 hours
Female refractory period: 9 months

Refractory period actually means the time after an orgasm during which you aren't sexually responsive, not the time between you can't get pregnant again, so it's not 9 months for women.

Except that the female biological imperative isn't simply to get pregnant—it's to get pregnant with the best available genetic code.

Why would men have less incentive to get the best available genetic code?

And why would a woman not want to have the option to choose between 5 Chads instead of just 1 Chad? Or choose between 5 HTN instead of 1 HTN?

 

[Reckless Turtle]

Refractory period actually means the time after an orgasm during which you aren't sexually responsive, not the time between you can't get pregnant again, so it's not 9 months for women.

I'm using the term to refer to a reproductive possibility, otherwise, the term has no practical application for females.

Why would men have less incentive to get the best available genetic code?

Male refractory period: 6 to 72 hours
Female refractory period: 9 months

And why would a woman not want to have the option to choose between 5 Chads instead of just 1 Chad? Or choose between 5 HTN instead of 1 HTN?

They would, but the first option is statistically very rare (at least without the internet).

 

[thenewhebbe]

Men wont take care of a kid that isnt his and if they were dating he would just kill her and the kid

And men with 500 kids in the past were probably just tyrants

 

[Deleted member 14693]

I just realized its completly natural for a women to cheat if you don't impregnate her ASAP

Think about it. You fuck her all this time without it leading to impregnation, what is this going to signal to the biological mechanism? That the man is infertile and his genes are useless, so she is biologically wired to search for another man to get pregnant. So its actually perfectly...

looksmax.org

 

[ambiguous]

woah! heavy

 

[MoggerGaston]

Cope.

Women have no real sex-drive due to low testosterone levels. How the fuck would they ever be more promisceous than men naturally?

0 logic

 

[incel194012940]

evolutionarhy psych is a meme field

this is already in it and a famous book the hypothesis that women moan to attract as many sexual partners in the vicinity as possible and the one with the longest penis probably impregnates her

 

[thereallegend]

I think you are very correct. One important thing however, no man or woman have the exact same exact strategy printed in their DNAs. One shouldn't generalize every man and woman as the same in their gender. Some men will be more akin to spread their gene(not necessarily alpha) and some more akin to invest(not necessarily beta).

R/k theory

 

[thereallegend]

Cope.

Women have no real sex-drive due to low testosterone levels. How the fuck would they ever be more promisceous than men naturally?

0 logic

Black women exist

Extremely high test levels and are extremely horny

 

[TsarTsar444]

Amazed at your social iq levels, im seriously not trying to insult here but do you have autism? Never asked you that (srs question)

 

[AlexAP]

do you have autism?

No, do you?

 

[TsarTsar444]

No, do you?

No i have ADHD

 

[TsarTsar444]

Idk where to even start because of how illogical it is. But basically your core point is the women are LESS monogamous then men , what did my eyes just witness, if your point was how women aren't true monogamists then i would at least partially agree or even mostly.

The "no dna test in nature" is exactly the reason why no male will commit to caring for a child when he doesn't know it is his if he knows the women sleeps with other men

Contraception isn't a thing in nature, and women need to be extra careful with who they have sex with, 9 months of pregnancy, the risk of dying at childbirth, the increased need for nutrition during the whole ordeal etc made it so women seek a male carefully that those 9 months of mild-moderate or even severe stress makes it worth it.

Your point how "women also benefit from having sex with different men" is technically correct im the sense how if they already choose a guy and had a kid with him, but then met a guy who mogs the first one very obviously, then her mating strategy can start getting conflicting desires to either cheat with him cause even better genes BUT risk first guy finding out and male agression kicking in because of the grim truth of not knowing now if this second child she is pregnant with is his or with the guy she cheated with.

If a male fucks 3 girls at the same night while they 4 were all alone, and the females get pregnant, then he knows 100% the kid is his, if you reverse the roles then the 3 men will never know which child the women carries and non will want to commit to raising it

 

[AlexAP]

The "no dna test in nature" is exactly the reason why no male will commit to caring for a child when he doesn't know it is his if he knows the women sleeps with other men

But men will never know anyway, they just can't know for sure, women can just lie and that's it. It's a conflicting strategy.

If a male fucks 3 girls at the same night while they 4 were all alone, and the females get pregnant, then he knows 100% the kid is his, if you reverse the roles then the 3 men will never know which child the women carries and non will want to commit to raising it

But if a woman fucks 3 men at different times and convinces one that he is the father, he could care for it. If that's what the woman want (maybe the community could take care of her and the child anyway if no man commits).

 

[TsarTsar444]

But men will never know anyway, they just can't know for sure, women can just lie and that's it. It's a conflicting strategy.

But if a woman fucks 3 men at different times and convinces one that he is the father, he could care for it. If that's what the woman want (maybe the community could take care of her and the child anyway if no man commits).

"Will never know", you realize that this is totally random and he can catch her cheating. The least bad thing would be to just leave her, while a more realistic aproach would be violance.

How is the women going to "convice" a male that it is his kid? Is she going to use voodoo magic or something? This is taking care of your offspring, the number 1 purpose of every biological organism, a male can never be conviced in nature that its definitely his child and not someone elses one with different genes.

Communities that would have cared for women like those are extinct a long time ago, only a very small number of native american clans from the Iroquois confederacy were discovered to be matriarchal, with about 98% of tribes discovered by western europeans in the non western world being patriarchal, regardless of continents and social isolation from other cultures.

Basically even if a community would accept that women and take care of her kid somehow, no other man would touch her cause she has shown to everyone how she isn't faithful and "if she did it to him, then she could do it to me" mentality, once a cheater always a cheater, this will have further and further ill effects on the whole community cause males will be just more distrusting between eachother and shit loads of other consequences.

Every single noj patriarchial society was wiped out the face of the earth by male polygamous patriarchal ones, just know this as a side note

 

[Deleted member 24781]

Just think about it: What would be the sexual strategies for men and women? Evopsych says for men it's to get the most women pregnant possible, for women it's to get the best man to make her pregnant because pregnancy has more costs for her. But that does make only sense if men don't want to provide for their offspring, because if men would get literally 600 women pregnant, they would not be capable to provide for all of them or even spend time with them.

The reality is: Men usually want to provide for their offspring. However, it's true at the same time that men are naturally wired to like to sleep with multiple women. But the reason might be two different strategies, both for men and women.
----> (1) Creating offspring: Get many women pregnant (men) / Get pregnant (women)
----> (2) Caring for offspring: Being a present father to your child (men) / being a present mother to your child (women)

Here now the brutal reality:
(1)
----> If men want to get many women pregnant, the best strategy is to sleep with as many women as possible.
----> If women want to get pregnant, the best strategy is to sleep with as many men as possible.

There is no difference here! Both men and women should logically have the same strategy to maximize the chance for offspring: Sleeping with multiple people from the opposite sex. Women for example could reduce the risk of choosing an infertile man by sleeping with many men, one of them will surely get her pregnant.

(2)
----> If a man wants to be a present father to his child, **the only strategy** (!) is to sleep consistently with only one woman who doesn't sleep with others (monogamy) to ensure that her offspring is yours.
----> If a woman wants to be a present mother to her child, **she still can sleep with many men** (!), because she will always know that her child will be hers and there's no DNA test in nature, so no men will know whether she cheated or not.

This shows that women have less incentives for monogamy than men. They don't need it to ensure their parenthood, only men would need to sleep consitently with one woman to be sure that they're the father.

TL;DR: Women are naturally designed to be more promiscuous than men, as they don't need to sleep with only one man to ensure that their offspring is theirs; meanwhile men who want to provide for a child need a monogamous relationship to be sure of their paternity.

The men who women pick will be the best of her available pool of men. So, the woman will not feel the need to seek out another partner while in the relationship. A woman's hypergamous desires change like the time of day.

 

[darkness97]

weird seeing someone put so much effort into a thread only to be completely wrong by the end of it all.

 

[incel194012940]

weird seeing someone put so much effort into a thread only to be completely wrong by the end of it all.

think: how is a nazi making that statement and a cute anime boy different? what different vibes come from that?

 

[darkness97]

think: how is a nazi making that statement and a cute anime boy different? what different vibes come from that?

alright, alright i will change it back LOL

 

[AlexAP]

The men who women pick will be the best of her available pool of men.

"The best" doesn't have to be one person. And of course both genders have standards, so they have to settle for the best *they can get*.

 

[Deleted member 24781]

"The best" doesn't have to be one person. And of course both genders have standards, so they have to settle for the best *they can get*.

Women are serially monogamous?