Is there any scientific research on female hypergamy by well known institutions?
scientific method pro tip: don't start with a conclusion and look for evidence to support it
>>16884375the rejected men dont deserve to reproduce
>>16884375Humans have relatively low sexual dimorphism so our males were either doing a lot of raping or our females were not hypergamous
>>16884439people need sexbut no one is owed sexit's kinda fucked up
>>16884378it is called a hypothesis.
>>16884375this is wrong because it says "partner with". this is the chart for casual sex, for long term committed partner men are just as selective as women are, maybe even more so because men have the option of being an R strategist and women dont.
I think this is from Tinder stats, how women rate men and men rate women.Pay attention how it's formulated: WOULD HAPPILY PARTNER. Not actually partner.
>>16884441>Very few men were having sex with all the womenVery few men such as Elon Musk
>>16884441>only one in 8 males got to pass on his genesthose monkey features got un-selected
>>16885110And we lost the smart males in favor of dumb but hotNo further consideration for human evolution
>>16885110who is the better man
>>16884375Okay but roo bad women are stupider than the average incel.
>>16885121Neither in the grand scheme of things.
Women's selection is rather less eugenic than people tend to believe
>>16885143I don't know how to read that.
>>16885143Feminist crap is brainwashing for foreign occupation.
Physiologically, it is difficult for women to reproduce. It is easy for men to reproduce. This means women will seek men that are most attractive (high health focus), whereas men will seek women in general, with little regard for attractiveness (minimal health focus).
>>16884441it's weird how this didn't result in greater dimorphism. there is definitely something off. 1 male per 8 females is extreme even for the most alpha mammals and some mammals with a far less ratio than this have males that are double the size of females
>>16885282True for some species but there are many strategies.
>>16885332The males who were mating were similar in size to the females, not large.
>>16885143the effect size changes significantly when you separate them for the number of sex partners
>>16885472>first child before 22 (N=45865)what is going on in the UK?
>>16884375>>16884378>>16884836Kek, thought I entered a /sci/ humour thread
>>16884375This wouldn't even be a question if you bothered to read even the most basic books on how mate selection in our past has shaped humans as they are today.If you genuinely wondered/cared about this topic, you'd read them. https://wwnorton.com/books/9781324061748https://global.oup.com/academic/product/an-introduction-to-behavioral-endocrinology-sixth-edition-9780197542750
>>16884425>>16884441>>16884375>>16885143Hypergamy is a social practice. We can't draw definitive conclusions from genetics only.>>16885107Elon musk seems to be the exception to the rule. Wealth and status alone do not make a man into a seed spreader, unless Gates, Zuck, Bezos, and so on are all hiding their bastards from the public eye.
>>16884375women are just stupid, their ideal type wouldnt even want them. if you keep giving them non sexual attention theyll keep trying to get the better dude its fucked
>>16887333>Those guys bang a lotDo you have any evidence for this?>Only because of birth controlSo? That doesn't explain why men like Elon musk, Nick Cannon, Donald Trump, and DMX have many kids with many women, while men in seemingly similar stations in life have at most a few kids with only 1 woman.
>>16887449Considering that there's plenty of broken degenerates with tons of kids, it seems that the only that separates the seed spreaders from not is the desire to be one.
>>16887004Unless women are randomly choosing the one man out of many to breed them and rejecting the rest with equal probability then hypergamy would definitely show up in genetics and it would be a 1-to-1 causal relation.
>>16887768This is a big part of it too. Bear in mind that today the biggest indicator of success is not physical power at the top of a hierarchy, but money and assets with as little hierarchy as possible. Your kids, wife, anyone else involved in your circle would be competition vying to cut off portions of your wealth.
>>16884375>its another episode of Professor Jiang chinese man philosopherDude, every time this nigga posts a new episode we get posts like this the same day or within one. Fuck off if you're going to tell me you don't know who I'm talking about. Yes you do you lying faggot.
>>16885476>>16885472So women tend to choose ADHD, lowly educated, moronic, short men. Guess that's it for us, bros...
>>16884375hypergamy wouldn't be a thing if the majority of men were not dysgenic failmales
>>16884386Sub 7 women don’t either.
>>16885002What about men who think they have settled? Do they cheat?
>>16890109It takes two to make one, so dysgenic maie and female? How would you avoid it? Avoid women who are below 6 feet?
>>16884375men only care about passion on *their* own geneswomen care about selecting *superior* genes, because reproductive cost of female is very high compared to menyou can just jerk off 10 times a day, whereas once a woman gets pregnant, she has to incur the cost for 9 months and post-birth care.female hypergamy is only logical, because if you are spending that much amount of energy in bringing a baby, you better bring out superior ones.
>>16890866What about swiping women on dating websites? They are selective too.
>>16887004>musk seems to be the exception to the rule.He's not even mating, he's using IVF injections
>>16884375Women joining the labor market + hypergamy = increased scarcity of potential mates -> decreasing birth rates
>>16884375Am I a schizo for believing most studies into gender dynamics, sexual selection, the effects of hookup culture, generally dont get funding, are biased if they do, and sometimes even get binned before they can begin by administration?
>>16886248Could you provide the source of that screenshot? I'm new to the topic and would like to read more.
>>16890903women are more attracted to status than genes in comparison to men, and are often willing to trade looks (a heuristic for genes) for higher social status. Also put in consideration the fatherly parental care, which is although of lower cost than that of mothers but is still very costly.
>>16884375>by well known institutionsappeal to authority. okcupid published their data 10+ years ago, don't know why this isn't good enough for you. there's no incentive for an institution to research this, it's a political topic. paternity tests in france are illegal because they destroy families, this isn't about science.
>>16885282>Physiologically, it is difficult for women to reproduce.Are you female and have had kids? if not, how would you know what you are you talking about?
>>16894532Retard. When it comes to matters of evolutionary psychology, you must look at it from the POV of a female 10,000 years ago. Females are the vulnerable sex. They have to incubate a baby and for 9 months they can only use a fraction of their strength (which is already weaker than men to begin with). Men can get a thousand females pregnant and father hundreds per year without much investment at all, but females can only birth once per year. That makes sperm cheap and it makes females picky about their mates. Men must spread their seed as wide a net as possible to ensure their paternity and women must pick the best mates. It's fucking common sense and you'd have to be intuitively retarded not to see it.
>>16894535So that would be a "no".
>>16894535poo'd on
>>16890076do you know why they choose adhd? its because we have higher iqs i hate the whole adhd thing in psychiatry since adderall doesnt really address the underline problem with adhd effectively in the sense that we have it real adhd isnt inability to focus thats just being retardedyou make random noises here and there with loud words etc im not going to describe it perfectly or other people will start larping its not being autistic either
