what's the science behind this?
Life history strategy (batemans principle). Inkwells try to make some moralistic argument about feminism with this, but in reality both sexes just seek maximum darwinian advantage like always
>>16284017Throughout human history, most women reproduced but only a fraction of men did. Now around 50% of women will never had a child. Perhaps that means in a couple of generations the women who cause the distribution in OP's image will be eliminated from the gene pool but this outcome is quite unusual historically speaking.
>>16284002The sex which invests the most in reproduction selects, the other competes.>>16284030Dysgenic breeding will collapse civilisation in 300 years. But perhaps the women’s standards over this period will drop.
>>16284002Women are worse at self-reporting their behavior and preferences than men are. Their cushy and coddled lives afford them the luxury of not needing to learn how to conduct thorough self-analysis or introspection. As a result, they are phenomenally ignorant about their own behavior and tendencies. This allows them to make fantastical claims which don't reflect reality. For example, when asked, most women claim that they wouldn't date a man who's less than 6 feet, 6 figures, and 6 inches. But in reality, 95% of women settle for less than this and are happy.
>>16284002Simple capitalism. Sperm is cheap, eggs are not.
men follow the pareto distribution, women follow the normal. Sucks to suck.
>>16284049>and are happylol
>>16284002Men are better rateists than women.
Both of these are accurate and women are just objectively better than men.
>>16284030>Now around 50% of women will never had a childI wanted to find a source for this, so I tallied up the data from herehttps://www.census.gov/library/stories/2022/04/fertility-rates-declined-for-younger-women-increased-for-older-women.htmland actually got closer to only 34-41% of women ever having children. And this isn't accounting for multiple births.Also as a side-note>While fertility rates broadly declined in the United States from 1990-2019, there was a mini baby boom in the early 2000s.>This increase was driven by foreign-born Hispanic women.lol lmao
>>16284002Now survey the intramural perception of attractiveness: you'll find that women overrate their men and men underrate their women.
>>16284002women look better than men on average
>>16284030Women would rather end their bloodline than mate with an average man.
>>16284002Women wear ridiculous amounts of make-up and put extreme effort into their physical attraction, except those that will not stop eating.
>>16284133>fascistTell me about this man.
>>16284002Women vs the central limit theorem
princess syndrome
>>16284030lollmaodumb women reproduce waaay more than intelligent women. And while dumb men reproduce more than intelligent men, successful men ( which intelligence is correlated with ) are more popular with women and so have more opportunity to reproduce.The distribution is going to get even worse.
>>16284927Depends on religiosity. For religious women, the highly intelligent ones reproduce more than the dumb ones. For the non-religious, the highly intelligence women might as well have been born without reproductive organs because their rate of producing babies is so low. Dumb non-religious women reproduce at about the same rate at dumb religious women. If you want a bunch of kids, find a high IQ religious woman.
>>16284613lol the fuglies are so lonely they actually respond to bait accounts.
