Even in sex looks are not everything man looks theory is riduculous after a certain looks level. If you are gigachad ofc women throw themselfs to you but because of that thinking looks=everything is a post modernist tier of reasoning jfl.
They looked ugly as fuck probably but everybody was tall men were 5'11 on average and women were 5'5
Nigga read a book written by a WOMAN about relationships
But nothing bad about wanting to be gigachad tho
So gl cave girls didnt exist ?
Reading a book is funny by itself reading a book about relationships even more funny and a book about relationships that written by a woman ?Nigga read a book written by a WOMAN about relationships
Indeed
Probably
Reading a book is funny by itself reading a book about relationships even more funny and a book about relationships that writen by a women ?
But men were all jacked and bearded chads
Your Low IQ is beaming through my screen.There's a reason you got so many incel dudes attracted to this shit. It's because they can't get laid and the only way they can is to shame women into monogamy to increase their chances. Complaining about women having sex is a beta/incel trait. Meanwhile for any HTN+, this shit is a blessing for us. I support sex liberation. Makes it easier to get laid. Prudery is cancer and is only for cockblocking incel losers.
A wild incel explaining to a stacy online on why he's a better match for her than Chad/Tyrone JFL
Meanwhile chad:
INB4 low IQ incel rage.
"YoU'rE a COpeR. You ProB Aren'T EveN AttrAcTivE"
"Ok NiGgEr"
Lifefuel for Femoids and faggots
He is just trying to sound like a winner in current societies standarts jfl indeed sheep iq
We live under liberalism right now and 30% of men can’t get sex. Women being “LIBERATED” is an important part of liberalism.
“It doesn't matter if someone is the bravest or fears the most. The onlything noteworthy what decides your dominance is your looks.How the fuck Napoleon is a beta ?
Nigga literally brave the impossible many times
You must differentiate looks from other things
Then go to my previous posts and bring an counterargument. To exert dominance you need to be superior. To dominate requires one to be genetically superior, in other words his looks. Idk why you deny this.
i totally get what u are saing and you dont get me even a bit and you dont even believe in evolution theory so no pointin counter arguement jfl
Bro you are brain dead ngl
Correct me if I am wrong then. What you say is that dominance isn't achieved by genetic superiority? If this is your argument the defence of it is on you if it isn't you still leave the gap open in what exactly causes one to dominate the other.
Looks doesnt show the genetic superiorty. A gook with flat maxilla would blow your brain out would fuck your wife and breed with her in a war. And this is respectfully how humans were for thousands of years. And how you behave literally show your position in hierarchy of a tribe for example women like controlling and dominant men more low inhib nt high tier normie >>>>>>> autistic chad.
Cope, why is this gook in a war the first place if not to acquire my belonging that I happened to gain without manslaughter. The reason he is in this war he couldn't acquire it through 'fair' means.
That's not true. Most men who lived reproduced, this can be proven through autosomal DNA. But their lineages died off over the time.
Temujin didnt have hundred of kids
Most men produced because most men lived in civilized times we discussed you this before and you agreed with me
My position was already given before my birth lmao so is all of humanity. Women like controlling attractive males more then controlling unattractive males. Because the attractive male is controlling anyone else who is unattractive can't be controling. It's already predetermined who is supposed to be controlling and who isn't.
Mirin making human species literal prideless bonobos
Then your point doesn't seem hold much.IT IS NOT THE MY POINT LMAAOOOO
And? Who said war was moral?
The war is only immoral if you are not able to defend yourself it was always the case in history
I was refering to that, it's not true. This article discusses the 1:17-myth:@SayHeyHey @Beetlejuice @AlexAP @Chadeep OVER FOR THIS FORUMS IQ LEVELS TBH %95 OF MEN LIVED IN CIVILIZED MONOGAMY TIMES THEREFORE REPRODUCED BUT IT WASNT THE CASE FOR PRIMITIVE CAVE AGE THAT WHERE WE EVOLVED WITH NO MORALS OR LAWS AND WITH ALL THAT RAPE AND THAT CAUSE WOMEN TO PREFER MASCULINE MEN REGARDLESS OF HIS LOOKS AT SOME POINTS BUT NOT ALWAYS FOR EXAMPLE MOST WOMEN EVEN FALL IN LOVE WITH UGLY CRIMINALS WHILE LOOKS STILL BEING %75 OF ATTRACTION YOU RETARDS CANT EVEN MAKE THAT REASONING IT IS SO FUNNY LMAOO
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...slate.com
westhunt.wordpress.com
IF IT IS NOT 1:17 THEN IT IS 1:10 OR 1:5 REGARDLESS OF IT CAVEMAN GAD HAREMS AND EVEN IN RECENT TIMES ARYAN INVASION IN EUROPE CAUSED AN ENTIRE RACES MALE LINEAGE TO NEARLY EXTINCT AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT LITERAL FUCKING CAVE TIMES LMAOO AND THE SOURCE YOU LINKED IS FUCKING WORDPRESS LMAO AND EVEN WITHOUT SOURCE OR ANYTHIBG YOU JUST NEED 2 BRAINCEL TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM SAINGI was refering to that, it's not true. This article discusses the 1:17-myth:
Y-chromosome crash
A recent paper on Y-chromosome phylogeny found that a big fraction of Y-chromosomes fall into a few star-cluster lineages that are a few thousand years old. You’ve already heard of some …
No, their lineages died off over the time. Some men came and reproduced with the native population, and their descendants had better chances to survive for centuries. It was never 1:17, 1:10 or 1:5.
The thing you dont understand is men of same tribes/same regions share the same y dna so even just a man fucking entire town and having kids with them without all other males having kids still wont make other males lineage dead
Potentially we are never able to defend our self. There is nothing that guarantees it.
Yeah ?
The Aryan invaders did not have the same DNA than the native population.
Sure did and everything is facts. Even women hated on her and sent her death threats. And now look at all you beta bluepillers defend your "muh queens" JFLNigga read a book written by a WOMAN about relationships
. Aint no such thing as an angel phaggot. Keep coping.
Yeah but i was talking about caveman of same regions
Name of the book ?Sure did and everything is facts. Even women hated on her and sent her death threats. And now look at all you beta bluepillers defend your "muh queens" JFL
Men were made to slay. Monogamy is for coping losers. Only beta blue pilled pussies settle down.@SayHeyHey @Beetlejuice @AlexAP @Chadeep OVER FOR THIS FORUMS IQ LEVELS TBH %95 OF MEN LIVED IN CIVILIZED MONOGAMY TIMES THEREFORE REPRODUCED BUT IT WASNT THE CASE FOR PRIMITIVE CAVE AGE THAT WHERE WE EVOLVED WITH NO MORALS OR LAWS AND WITH ALL THAT RAPE AND THAT CAUSE WOMEN TO PREFER MASCULINE MEN REGARDLESS OF HIS LOOKS AT SOME POINTS BUT NOT ALWAYS FOR EXAMPLE MOST WOMEN EVEN FALL IN LOVE WITH UGLY CRIMINALS WHILE LOOKS STILL BEING %75 OF ATTRACTION YOU RETARDS CANT EVEN MAKE THAT REASONING IT IS SO FUNNY LMAOO
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...
The Author is Esther Vilar. Read both the books "The Manipulated man" and "The Polygamous Sex: A Man's Right to the Other Woman". She's speaking facts these tradcon soyboys and feminists don't want to hear.
No some men that lived in k selective regions made for having families and raising kids and teaching how to survive to them but you having a family doesnt change the fact you can have a harem
Ok incel
If you don't have a side chick, you're living life wrong.
