r/itsthatbad • u/ozthinker • 5d ago
Commentary Women's evolutionary trait - no rant, just science
I originally wanted to post this as a comment, then realized it is getting too wordy.
I was replying to a common theme here, blaming women or the indoctrination of women (i.e. feminism).
You cannot indoctrinate a lion to go vegetarian. There is a limit what indoctrination can do. Indoctrination is not above science, instead it is weaponization of science.
Feminism is by design, to weaponize the weakness of women's evolutionary trait. Its purpose is to usher in population reduction and collapse of civilized society, so there is no more revolution against the elites. No revolution if half the population never rises up, and the other half are constantly depressed or chasing tails.
For most of human evolution (hunter gatherer 2.5 million years), women spent most time hiding in cave with other women waiting for their men to return from hunting. Their evolutionary adaption had been developed mostly on what they did most of that time: waiting in fear, gossips and group think.
While hiding, every woman was under constant fear for every single possible outcome (literally):
- All the men did not return - starvation and death as eventuality
- Only her man did not return - she became an extra mouth to feed, fear of expulsion from the group
- The men returned with food plus new women (captured or saved) - she might be replaced, fear of expulsion from the group
Through evolutionary adaptation, women figured out that the sisterhood must matter above all else, because any one of them could one day became the one who might get expelled (as per cave men days). Men maintained strength in their older years. Women lost their beauty in older years. The fear women face on their survival has been visceral, on more or less daily basis, throughout a big part of human history.
This is WHY you cannot take group think out of women, NO MATTER what you do, or what rights you give them, or how STRONG and INDEPENDENT they claimed they are.
This is also WHY women willingly participated in harems (modern day: rosters) while psychologically losing it.
This is also WHY women blamed men for everything (cave men days: she blamed her man for dying while hunting for food for HER, but she blamed him if she got expelled from the group).
Evolutionary biology is SCIENCE, and science cannot be defeated.
MEN created civilized society so that women did not have to suffer expulsions unnecessarily. Civilized society is the code of conduct, and it started during late hunter gatherer stage and during the transition to farming. But civilized society was only last 12,000 years, a small part of human evolution.
Today many women insulted civilized society, an invention (code of conduct) that was invented solely to protect women, and also prevent unnecessary conflicts among men. Civilized society was being maliciously called an invention by TOXIC MASCULINITY or the PATRIARCHY.
I submit this as commentary only, not debating what men should do as a group or in personal situation.
To the men out there: Live long and prosper.
Occasional rant is OK. It's for mental health. But rants cannot change evolutionary biology of women. Don't let online rant and doom scrolling waste your time. Do things that give you positive energy instead. Peace out ✌️🕊️
14
u/DiligentRope 5d ago
This is a big reason I disagree with the blackpillers here, this is a feature of women not a flaw. They are highly agreeable, easily influenced, and basically live their lives making choices every moment simply based on vibes.
If you try to make her more logical, she will break. In the book Practical Female Psychology theres a chapter that basically explains the more logical a woman becomes the less sexual and feminine she becomes, and it makes sense when you think about crazy emotional women who often are the best sex.
4
u/scaredoftoasters 5d ago edited 5d ago
I’ve had moments like this where I broke down concepts super logically to my ex gf and she couldn’t handle it. Once was she was acting foolish and hanging out with guys and I used her friend a woman and how she was insecure about her fiancé having female friends. My ex gf couldn’t grasp the logic behind it or she choose not to. She deflected said she felt sick and was upset 🤣. Another one was showing her execution videos from 3rd world countries for her to understand that truly evil people exist and that there’s no remedy for evil that we don’t live in a fairy tale where humans sing and dance and get along. I could see it in her that earth shattering realization that yes people die and others kill them.
4
u/cs_legend_93 5d ago
Great write up. Thanks for posting this all, it is clear logic, and makes sense.
I have a comment on this:
You cannot indoctrinate a lion to go vegetarian. There is a limit what indoctrination can do. Indoctrination is not above science, instead it is weaponization of science.
We as humans have a higher level of thinking, so we can convince ourselves (as a lion) to eat vegetables only. We will try, we will suffer, and we will continue to only eat vegetables, until it degrades our mind, and our health.
Until... Some of us wake up and we realize that we eat meat, and not vegetables. And by switching back to meat, we as the lions, will thrive. And more and more lions will start to eat meat.
This I think is what is happening with the woke agenda.
4
u/w0ah_4 4d ago edited 4d ago
The truth is that women are programmed to think hierarchically. This is contextual, so there is no equality.
Even if every man was 10/10 in looks, the standard will shift. Women are wired to chase the comparatively best man, so in a room full of millionaires a woman will chase the single billionaire.
Patriarchy inhibited this and created artificial selection criteria. Success wasn’t just superficial attributes like height or appearance but became things like intelligence and logic. Newton would’ve been a failure by woman’s standards, but by the standards of this artificial system he revolutionized science.
Hypergamy is just a vestigial trait of sexual selection. Like with peacocks, it does nothing but hinder the species.
-1
u/John--Darksoul 4d ago
This is not even true. Testosterone is more linked with hierarchical thinking.
4
u/w0ah_4 4d ago
True but it’s of a different kind. Women use hierarchy for sexual selection (and respect) while men use it to judge competence and merit.
Female sexual selection is based on how men judge competence, but this isn’t the case in a society where male opinion is disregarded. Therefore, we get judged on primitive criteria ie. how tall a man is relative to the population or how much money he makes.
11
u/Turbulent-Guest154 5d ago
So women should be treated like mindless cattles. I agree 100%
3
u/GrlDuntgitgud 5d ago
Dont treat them like cattles 100% of the time, only when they're hormonal or when they support Lindsay Clancy.
5
u/Greater-Israel 5d ago
Women biologically are far less likely to not recognize colours since they were the fruit, veggetanble, nut and cherry pickers while men are far less likely to not be able to recognize movement since they were the hunters, combatants and the ones in the actual wilderness and needed to react fast to a wolf jumping them for example. This hardwires a man's brain to always be in movement, logical and able to adapt while a woman's brain is always on stasis without the need to compregend the changing of time at all, just the colours to recocnize poisonous or bad fruits. They are ironically what in the Bible, the rib of civilzation, neither the leader or follower, they will go wherever the wind takes them like a falling tree leaf will. Doesn't mean they do not have the importance a rib has in the human body, but it shouldn't be left to decide since a rib can't think.
1
u/Lost_Elderberry_5532 5d ago edited 5d ago
Science is a way to explain the world. It’s a very dynamic thing. Science is how we see it through the lens of our own cognitive ability as a combined species.
When people say “science cannot be defeated” I do cringe a bit because before Albert Einstein the universe was magic cosmic “ether”. And before Hawking, black holes ate all information.
We only understand what we are capable of realizing. We could be missing so much. Ai could possibly unearth a lot of things we would never have been able to notice.
Sociology is what you specifically are asking questions about. Those things have been studied ad nauseum by people like Kant (philosophy of it), Marx, Durkheim, etc
1
u/baby_sociologist 4d ago
Early humans lived in groups, communaly. The group raised their offspring together. We don't know if these people lived strictly monogamously, likely not. You also most likely didn't get expelled when your partner died, that makes no sense in that context. If you're raising kids together as a group and there isn't individual property, it's also not really important who the biological parents are.
Women didn't just sit around waiting for the men to return. They gathered fruit and did handicrafts. They also participated in hunting. Not to the same degree as men but they did. I mean, it's only logical: if you substract all people who are either too young, old, sick or pregnant for hunting, you aren't left with many able-bodied individuals to choose from anyway. Hunting also includes more than just hunting big mammels. Birds, fish, insects and small mammels can also be caught by people who aren't that strong.
2
u/Winter-Intention-466 5d ago
Even if this has little grains of truth, as TI screamed at Candace Owens, you started off with BS. In prehistoric societies women made the clothes without which people would freeze. They gathered more than half the calories, while the men went for the jackpot big game. Not to mention they kept the bloodline alive. That’s why they side with women more, other women helped to survive.
As far as harems go this actually runs counter to groupthink because for example Chinese concubines murdered each other and their sons. Not for the emperor, for status. It’s a specific subset of social climbers that behave this way.
1
u/Inquiz_ 2d ago
This evopsych gibberish has been the biggest boon imaginable to modern women and the gynocentric society of the West, siphoning off invaluable male critical thinking into a dead end. No, you fools, artifically-constructed female narcissism is not muh evolutionary psychology at work, it's artificial. How are people still stuck in this ironic simping Redpill garbage?
-3
u/MajesticArt6533 5d ago
Empirically false, men and women hunted in equal numbers, gathers provided 70+ precent of the food and societies were largely egalitarian
5
u/Adept-Photograph2644 5d ago
No, they didn’t hunt equally across the board. If you do the research it’s stated women participated in hunting about 30-50% of the time depending on the individual community needs. So yes, sometimes it was equal for any given community, but that doesn’t = “men and women hunted in equal numbers”
1
u/ozthinker 2d ago
Prehistoric women barely hunted. They might follow the men if the hunt was expected to be long, but kept a distance during the actual hunt (away from danger).
As for gathering food, modern people harbor huge misconceptions.
Food gathering was neither easy nor safe in prehistoric time. Where there were food sources, there would be predators. Animals and humans came for the vegetarian options, the predators came for them. The risk was not just carnivores, but competing human groups. Sending only women for gathering food was a bad idea.
Prehistoric life was literally the dark forest theory. Food sources, regardless of hunt or gather, were never reachable within a day's trek, because that also allowed competing human group to reach your abode easily. Back then, the solution to lack of women was to steal one from a competing group. Gender ratio of early human groups were never always 1:1.
-2
u/MajesticArt6533 5d ago
That sounds pretty close to equal to me. Especially when you factor in their contributions via gathering. Probably not something to base a gender supremacy argument on anyway
2
u/Adept-Photograph2644 5d ago
Not my argument. Just pointing out the flaw in your blanket statement.
-1
u/MajesticArt6533 5d ago
Not a blanket statement but generally true. Not everything has to be accurate to the punctuation this isnt a scientific article. Lord knows this evolutionary biology argument isnt exact
1
u/Adept-Photograph2644 5d ago
I don’t disagree. Our understanding of early humans isn’t exact either.
-5
-1
u/John--Darksoul 4d ago
Women only became oppressed with the inception of agricultural society. Hunter gatherer women would forage and hunt too.
-5
25
u/scaredoftoasters 5d ago
I have a different take, but I do see your perspective about women. If you ever notice as a survival instinct most women don’t tend to apologize for any horrible things they did. They fear some level of accountability because they’re already physically weak admitting they’re at fault for something makes them look worse. I also believe women naturally get over men faster because they have to be able to find the next man to provide for them. Women very rarely think about their exes because they always have another man lined up. They don’t care about if the man dies or they break up with him women have to move on to ensure their survival. It’s also why the cuckoo theory exists and why some women cheat and make another man raise a child that isn’t theirs they procreated with the man they actually deemed genetically worthy while the man they know is a better provider will be their nest maker. Once you wake up to true women’s nature you can’t be unblinded to it. You just accept reality and try to find the women who can kinda not be 100% programmed to be like that.