How true is this statistic?? "40% of men and 98% of women..."

[MaghrebGator]

Found it in Faggotcentral.net

"Genetic testing shows that only 40% of men throughout history have procreated. At the same time 98%of woman who have existed have procreated. Woman pick the winners of evolution. It is in the programming. 40% men and 98% woman mean that throughout history the top men have had on average 2 1/2 woman. There a reality about this. Men for woman have been a tool for survival. Woman love opportunistically. Men at the bottom of the social order did not guarantee survival. It isn’t about love. Throughout time if a man had enough resources he could get multiple woman. It is relatively simple. If Man A was a great hunter and had enough to feed 10 people. Yet he has a girl. On the other side Man B was mediocre and had just enough to feed himself. Yet he is single. Girl is picking Man A. This is how woman have guaranteed their survival thru history. Tie themselves to the winners. Man A would get her attention and have multiple woman. Man B would die alone. Simply put history shows a woman rather be a mistress of a millionaire than the wife of a UPS driver."

Is it true that " Women would rather share a successful man than be attached to a faithful loser"?

Answer (1 of 13): Genetic testing shows that only 40% of men throughout history have procreated. At the same time 98%of woman who have existed have procreated. Woman pick the winners of evolution. It is in the programming. 40% men and 98% woman mean that throughout history the top men have had on...

www.quora.com

 

[MaghrebGator]

"B-b-but polygamy is medieval"

The only medieval thing here is your raggedy ass believing that by wearing colorful bracelets and letting your sensible and emotional side be shown you will finally get the girl you like.

 

[Daddy's Home]

Not to mention how the invaders in history would kill enemy men before they managed to have children, and then get to their women and steal / rape / pregnate them, which is even more brutal.

 

[imontheloose]

Yes. I’ve saw this before. May be slightly exaggerated, 98% is insane. But there is an overwhelming disparity, no doubt. 90% even is still ludicrous.

 

[Pento]

If you think about it most wars were fought by young men, so they never had the chance to reproduce. Like imagine how many young soldiers in Rome, Ww1 ww2 died and never got the chance to find love, how sad.

 

[imontheloose]

Not to mention how the invaders in history would kill enemy men before they managed to have children, and then get to their women and steal / rape / pregnate them, which is even more brutal.

This genuinely happened way more than people think. We only recently stopped doing it so blatantly.

 

[MaghrebGator]

If you think about it most wars were fought by young men, so they never had the chance to reproduce. Like imagine how many young soldiers in Rome, Ww1 ww2 died and never got the chance to find love, how sad.

Yeah but 60% of men definetly didn't die in war

 

[heightmaxxing]

I've heard 80% of women and 20% of men.

Majority of women in history didn't even hit puberty. Even if you only include women who reached a age where they can get pregnant a large amount would have died during pregnancy.

 

[heightmaxxing]

Yeah but 60% of men definetly didn't die in war

60% of men dying due to combat isn't that unreasonable. Maybe not in modern times but when humans were hunter gatherers it probably isn't too far off
Chatgpt says 30% died due to combat

 

[Chadmog]

It’s because of me faggots

 

[MaghrebGator]

60% of men dying due to combat isn't that unreasonable. Maybe not in modern times but when humans were hunter gatherers it probably isn't too far off
Chatgpt says 30% died due to combat

Chatgpt is made by a person whose great grandfather crossed the Red Sea with Moses and betrayed him to worship a calf so i don't believe him.

 

[greycel]

Found it in Faggotcentral.net

"Genetic testing shows that only 40% of men throughout history have procreated. At the same time 98%of woman who have existed have procreated. Woman pick the winners of evolution. It is in the programming. 40% men and 98% woman mean that throughout history the top men have had on average 2 1/2 woman. There a reality about this. Men for woman have been a tool for survival. Woman love opportunistically. Men at the bottom of the social order did not guarantee survival. It isn’t about love. Throughout time if a man had enough resources he could get multiple woman. It is relatively simple. If Man A was a great hunter and had enough to feed 10 people. Yet he has a girl. On the other side Man B was mediocre and had just enough to feed himself. Yet he is single. Girl is picking Man A. This is how woman have guaranteed their survival thru history. Tie themselves to the winners. Man A would get her attention and have multiple woman. Man B would die alone. Simply put history shows a woman rather be a mistress of a millionaire than the wife of a UPS driver."

Is it true that " Women would rather share a successful man than be attached to a faithful loser"?

Answer (1 of 13): Genetic testing shows that only 40% of men throughout history have procreated. At the same time 98%of woman who have existed have procreated. Woman pick the winners of evolution. It is in the programming. 40% men and 98% woman mean that throughout history the top men have had on...

www.quora.com

Women didn't have a choice

So the women who spread this line of thought in hopes to justify their hypergamy, are introducing a whole bigger problem, where it isn't necessarily the one who is the most attractive due to modern societal beauty standards, that they end up with...

They're either getting forced by a high T ogre or a smart guy who brings a lot of food to the group

 

[SecularIslamist]

Women didn't have a choice

So the women who spread this line of thought in hopes to justify their hypergamy, are introducing a whole bigger problem, where it isn't necessarily the one who is the most attractive due to modern societal beauty standards, that they end up with...

They're either getting forced by a high T ogre or a smart guy who brings a lot of food to the group

If women stayed in the kitchen I wouldn't complain - or complain less. Looks + height would matter a lot less.

Access to resources and money has been practically equalised in the 21st century - not to mention amongst zoomers women are now mogging guys. They need some kind of deprogramming - but instead they want everything that was possible back then (a high value rich guy) alongside what is possible now due to social media and globalisation (a 6'0+ ripped chad). Looks and height weren't that important but have become important. Hypergamy didn't take a backseat it just got amplified. To some women wealth may genuinely matter less (especially zoomers who realise they ain't ever getting on property ladder in NYC) but instead they will ignore well off guys for average earning but chad looks. If only men who could provide mattered to women, than pajeets and chinks in the West would mog everyone. But that's definitely not the case. Quite the opposite because they are bottom of the barrel.

Men will always be losers one way or another.

Scott Galloway speaks about this quite often.

 

[SecularIslamist]

If women stayed in the kitchen I wouldn't complain - or complain less. Looks + height would matter a lot less.

Access to resources and money has been practically equalised in the 21st century - not to mention amongst zoomers women are now mogging guys. They need some kind of deprogramming - but instead they want everything that was possible back then (a high value rich guy) alongside what is possible now due to social media and globalisation (a 6'0+ ripped chad). Looks and height weren't that important but have become important. Hypergamy didn't take a backseat it just got amplified. To some women wealth may genuinely matter less (especially zoomers who realise they ain't ever getting on property ladder in NYC) but instead they will ignore well off guys for average earning but chad looks. If only men who could provide mattered to women, mattered than pajeets and chinks in the West would mog everyone.

Scott Galloway speaks about this quite often.

@MaghrebGator I don't think any of that applies to non-western world (yet). Rich MTN probably mogs average earning HTN / Chadlite.

 

[EthiopianMaxxer]

I think the number is less than 40%, but also less than 98%