D
Deleted member 68396
.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2024
- Posts
- 235
- Reputation
- 302
Men want partnership, but it should be understood that due to the differences in sex drive means that a man always wants more sex than any one woman can provide. This has usually translated to various forms of concubineage historically. In fact many pre-modern societies practiced androcentric polygamy or quasi polygamy. Romans believed that a wife was merely for procreation. When she was born she was the property of her father and with marriage this ownership was transferred to her husband, alongside exclusive sexual access. Some things were considered odious for a married woman to perform, such as oral or anal sex. This is where prostitution and concubineage plays an important part. Concubines appealed to more romantic ideas and fantasies, a sort of elevated form of prostitution. Prostitution in its simplest form was merely a sexual release. If you define fetishism as anything that doesn't strictly pertain to procreation, this is where those needs were satisfied. It was seen as acceptable to defile a prostitutes mouth with oral sex. Anal sex was also possible here.
Although lack of fidelity was always theoretically punishable in both genders, it was usually the women who had harsher punishments for it.
Where keeping concubines wasn't always legally allowed there were practices that were tolerated. In fact in our own very West prostititution has always been a thriving industry. It was mostly married men who engaged in having sex with prostitutes.
Since women often died in childbirth it wasn't uncommon for a man to remarry
The biology of a woman does not support such a model of several partners because with her having to choose one man to impregnate her she must choose carefully. As no man is interested in raising offspring that isn't his, it is within her interests to stay with the male she had sex with. Not only that but it is a womans role to select for good attributes, ergo womans pickiness with whom she matrs with.
Male biology is completely different. A man can impregnate five different women in a single day. A horny man isn't always the best selector for genes because he has no nine month commitment for each successful act of procreation. In fact a horny man will often fuck a woman that is far beneath his genetic quality. Post nut clarity exists for a reason.
I think this is where you are confused. Men want some partnership, as in they desire to have exclusive sexual and reproductive access to women, but they gravitate towards polygamy due to their sex drive and ability to sire many children from different women simultaneously. A woman tends towards monogamy for the reasons I described. What changes is that a man, even though polygamous, doesn't have to swap partners. He can add to his harem for a lack of a better word. You see many species of mammals practicing this with one male holding access to several females, and IIRC this is quite common in primates too. Even in prehistory most men were incels if you follow the implication of some men holding several partners.
There has indeed been a change.
Two things:
Modern man is in every quantifiable less fertile than his progenitors. Men have less testosterone and lower sperm count.
Modern woman has access to contraception.
What I am arguing based on this is that the idea of a man dreaming of one woman type marriage is a very modern idea. A virile, premodern man desired exclusive partnership, but it is more like that of a lion having access to a large flock of females to mate with. Some societies still practice this in some form, with Islam allowing marriage to several women simultaneously.
Since the sexual act is no longer tied to her having a 9 month commitment and other responsibilities, it means female sex drive is more pleasure based than ever before. She still selects for genetic qualities (like I said a horny man will fuck anything, even an ugly fat pig, but a woman doesn't operate the same way) when mating more than any man ever will (on consistent basis).
If anything I'd argue that in some way the roles of what has existed has been swapped. Where a man used to desire a harem of women and a woman the best possible genetic match as an exclusive partner, now a woman can keep a harem of attractive males while many men dream of one single sexual partner. Is this because the average man is unable to compete without strict forms of societal structures like marriage and ability to restrict female mating choice? I lean towards saying yes, but I am putting this far too simplistically. A poor buyer can only afford what he can haggle unlike someone with a fat purse (in this case genetic capital is what is used as bargaining chips).
I've had this on my mind for some time and I think I will do a proper write-up in a new thread. Sorry if what I wrote is rather disjointed and not very well presented.. I am writing this in bed, one phone, ready to rest. I think the rough idea what I'm saying is clear despite the poor presentation.
I enjoyed reading your thread, so this is also a bump.
Edit:
slate.com
historum.com
Old Finding but it somewhat relates to what I am saying.
Although lack of fidelity was always theoretically punishable in both genders, it was usually the women who had harsher punishments for it.
Where keeping concubines wasn't always legally allowed there were practices that were tolerated. In fact in our own very West prostititution has always been a thriving industry. It was mostly married men who engaged in having sex with prostitutes.
Since women often died in childbirth it wasn't uncommon for a man to remarry
The biology of a woman does not support such a model of several partners because with her having to choose one man to impregnate her she must choose carefully. As no man is interested in raising offspring that isn't his, it is within her interests to stay with the male she had sex with. Not only that but it is a womans role to select for good attributes, ergo womans pickiness with whom she matrs with.
Male biology is completely different. A man can impregnate five different women in a single day. A horny man isn't always the best selector for genes because he has no nine month commitment for each successful act of procreation. In fact a horny man will often fuck a woman that is far beneath his genetic quality. Post nut clarity exists for a reason.
I think this is where you are confused. Men want some partnership, as in they desire to have exclusive sexual and reproductive access to women, but they gravitate towards polygamy due to their sex drive and ability to sire many children from different women simultaneously. A woman tends towards monogamy for the reasons I described. What changes is that a man, even though polygamous, doesn't have to swap partners. He can add to his harem for a lack of a better word. You see many species of mammals practicing this with one male holding access to several females, and IIRC this is quite common in primates too. Even in prehistory most men were incels if you follow the implication of some men holding several partners.
There has indeed been a change.
Two things:
Modern man is in every quantifiable less fertile than his progenitors. Men have less testosterone and lower sperm count.
Modern woman has access to contraception.
What I am arguing based on this is that the idea of a man dreaming of one woman type marriage is a very modern idea. A virile, premodern man desired exclusive partnership, but it is more like that of a lion having access to a large flock of females to mate with. Some societies still practice this in some form, with Islam allowing marriage to several women simultaneously.
Since the sexual act is no longer tied to her having a 9 month commitment and other responsibilities, it means female sex drive is more pleasure based than ever before. She still selects for genetic qualities (like I said a horny man will fuck anything, even an ugly fat pig, but a woman doesn't operate the same way) when mating more than any man ever will (on consistent basis).
If anything I'd argue that in some way the roles of what has existed has been swapped. Where a man used to desire a harem of women and a woman the best possible genetic match as an exclusive partner, now a woman can keep a harem of attractive males while many men dream of one single sexual partner. Is this because the average man is unable to compete without strict forms of societal structures like marriage and ability to restrict female mating choice? I lean towards saying yes, but I am putting this far too simplistically. A poor buyer can only afford what he can haggle unlike someone with a fat purse (in this case genetic capital is what is used as bargaining chips).
I've had this on my mind for some time and I think I will do a proper write-up in a new thread. Sorry if what I wrote is rather disjointed and not very well presented.. I am writing this in bed, one phone, ready to rest. I think the rough idea what I'm saying is clear despite the poor presentation.
I enjoyed reading your thread, so this is also a bump.
Edit:
8,000 Years Ago, Only One Man Had Children for Every 17 Women
Bad news for anyone who touts the idea that our ancient ancestors had it all figured out: Scientists have discovered evidence that, during the Stone...
Throughout human history, 40% of men have reproduced compared to 89% of women
I caught this on a recent podcast and then followed up seeing a number of article, suggesting that the number of men who reproduced was much lower compared to women. Firstly, does anybody have information on these numbers are they accurate? Are they somewhat accurate or are they way off? And if...
historum.com
Last edited:
.
