Please or Register to create posts and topics.

We'd still be on stone age if it weren't for men... And for women denying them sex!

Men destroy more, make more wars and cause far more harm than women do.

Without men, there would be less wars, less research on weapons and less use of weapons.

But men also build more.
They research more, invent more, and innovate more.

And so far, men have built far more than they have destroyed, which is why civilization has, on the overall, moved forward.
That must not necessarily always be the case: it's not written anywhere that the trend must always move forward. And one wrong move could erase centuries of development.
But so far, that's how it's been: an upward trend and advancement of civilization (with a huge acceleration in the last millennia and yet another acceleration in the last centuries).

Negating this simple fact is looking at the exceptions instead of the overall trend.
And the overall trend is that women who have built, have done so as the exceptions, within a man's world.

So for a long time, yours truly thought that if it weren't for men, we'd still be around stone age.
Then, I read an eye-opening passage from "Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters", and I had a eureka moment.

Men Build Only Because Women Are Sexually Selective

Imagine a world where women weren't sexually selective.

A world where women would have sex with any guy who asked for it.
What would happen in that society?
This is what Miller and Kanazawa say it would happen:

Absolutely nothing, because people would never stop having sex!
There would be no civilization in such a society, because people would not do anything besides have sex.

That's true.
In my simplistic "analysis" I always overlooked the obvious link: men build, in large part, for women.
In a world without women, or in a world with "always ready for sex women", we'd still probably be around stone age.

So yeah, turns out that civilization truly needs and benefits from both genders.
In case we needed one more, this another reason why extremist feminism or the polar opposite "male pride movement" are just plain nonsense.


Stef and Josue have reacted to this post.
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

jaja lets see what happens to civilization if one day males create perfect sexual cyborgs or doll robots slaves

Lucio Buffalmano and Josue have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoJosue
Quote from Stef on August 15, 2020, 6:55 am

jaja lets see what happens to civilization if one day males create perfect sexual cyborgs or doll robots slaves

We might not be that far from that.

Many people who are losing themselves in VR, videogames, and porn are already, in a way, giving up sexual and/or productive pursuits in exchange for no-added value gratifications.

Of course, there is a balance, and some VR, videogames, and porn can be perfectly normal and even healthy.
But plenty of people, mostly guys, are beyond the "healthy" threshold (from a self-development pont of view anyway, since "healthy" is subjective).

And yes, as you say, it's only gonna get more tempting as technology improves.
At a certain point, what a doll can do will surpass what a real woman (or man) can do. At that point, only the sense of emotional bonding with another human being will remain to prevent people from completely giving up on other humans.
And only the personal drive to achieve something, no matter if the returns are nil, will remain to prevent people from "making an impact", as it's popular these days to say.


Stef has reacted to this post.
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

As I said this is probably the best explanation of hypergamy in this era but there is one thing that cought my eye. “In environments with evenly distributed resources, as in many developed countries, looks will fare comparatively better.”  And “Rich societies decrease hypergamy”. I find it very hard to belive because  of the Harlow, H. F. basic primate instinct and the abundance social armageddon experiment. When too much is supplied the more is desired and reading your work(I enjoy reading it ?)   I found that the higher she is on the social hierarchy more she expects  so therefore man has to aquire more to make her standard.As Jordan Peterson said that only in scandinavia hypergamy has a bit of attenuation but thats not much so even in the most advanced countries hypergamy is pretty much the same.And for the looks part


First, even in the most egalitarian of modern societies, such as the Scandinavian countries, men still dominate women economically and politically. Men earn more than women over their lifespans, and they rise to higher positions in business and government. Women’s lot in modern industrialized nations is far better today than it was in the past, and it’s certainly much improved over the condition of women in traditional societies. Second, there’s the issue of social stratification in modern life. Even if a woman earns enough to support herself and her children, her standard of living will still be much better with a mate that’s also a good breadwinner. Thus, gender equality alone isn’t enough for women to shift their mate preferences from resources to looks. Instead, there would have to be society-wide equality of income as well. If all men earned roughly the same amount, then women certainly would value looks over resources because money would no longer be an issue. There was also Zhang, L., Lee, A. J., DeBruine, L. M., & Jones, B. C. (2019). Are sex differences in preferences for physical attractiveness and good earning capacity in potential mates smaller in countries with greater gender equality? Evolutionary Psychology. And they also found very little difference between the most egolitarian countries and traditional ones  when it comes to mate choice. Money did better even in  top countries. P.S I’m hoping socioeconomic status and some ok social intelligence will save me bcs I’m ugly af ?? ,thanks for your work it makes me less depressed ?.Best regards,

Hey mate,

Open up a new topic for your last post or it will go too off-topic from this one -and people won't be able to find that information later on-.

Ag good title could be something like "do money matter less in richer and socialistic societies" or "does hypergamy decrease in richer and more egalitarian societies".

P.S.: I have seen lots of "ugly" guys doing well. And no hunk here either 🙂


Stef has reacted to this post.
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?