If you believe in both Evolutionary Theory and JBW 'Theory', you're retarded

[QuantativeAnalyticalBS]

gynocentric state sponsered study. If this was true you have to ask yourself is society more eugenic or less eugenic since we have adopted technologies to basically allow females to have agency and state sponsered husbands (government). I will let you be the judge of that

You're leaving out the Jew, don't you ever leave out the Jew ever again!

 

[BeardedUnicorn]

This domain is dominated by autistic men who are outcasts. They aren't 'tradcels,' retard.

Arabs are caucasian LOL.

Where's your proof that women never had the ability to pick and choose?

Homogamous societies are formed by natural selection. The strict social codes reflect the selection pressure and people behaviourally were shaped by it. Female hypergamy makes women in modern society chase after Chads and high status men. Once again, this is a eugenic selection.

Unchecked hypergamy is only as rampant as it is because natural selection has been virtually eliminated and thus individualism has taken presidence in female mate selection when group level selection has broken down.

Oofy doofy is a real phenomenon as highlighted by Charles Darwin. If the environment is controlled and certain types of males are pushed and empowered within said society, when in actuality, they're genetically less fit, female mate selection can be overriden by said social engineering compelling them to select for the less genetically fit male over Chad.

>Arabs are caucasian LOL.

Tell that to anyone living in 15th century, some Arabs semi look white today because of the mixing between Crusades and slave trading mainly concentrated in the Levant and coastal Anatolia

>Where's your proof that women never had the ability to pick and choose?

Where is the proof that they did,? Women have traits of "selecting" for the survival of her and her offspring, this has nothing to do with muh eugenics. They were either the property of men, a harem, or in a transactional relationship in the form of modern society until very recently. War bride theory completely disputes any of these cope claims


>Homogamous societies are formed by natural selection. The strict social codes reflect the selection pressure and people behaviourally were shaped by it. Female hypergamy makes women in modern society chase after Chads and high status men. Once again, this is a eugenic selection.

So what explains the prevelance of AMWF in the States then? Prevelance of American GIs cleaning up with japanese brides, boomers in Vietnam, etc? You just contradicted your own word salad, by this logic then modern females should be sticking with their own kind but this is clearly not the case retard. Instead they choose "high value" men aka what makes their pussy tingle, which can be any race but due to global hypergamy its usually whites. And dont cope and say muh exploitation or ricecuck headcanon, again, these women choose these men because they simply look better than their men or for better economic opportunites. In any other period of history they would be captured as sex slaves or forced into submission

>Oofy doofy is a real phenomenon as highlighted by Charles Darwin. If the environment is controlled and certain types of males are pushed and empowered within said society, when in actuality, they're genetically less fit, female mate selection can be overriden by said social engineering compelling them to select for the less genetically fit male over Chad.

And there we have it everyone, an oofy doofy proponent. Either a fed or a ricecel. Again, they were with males that werent Chads because there was no access to the technology we have today, and survival was of more importance than having a pretty boy face. This is what happens when gynocentrists try to analyze female behavior, it doesn't work because females have NEVER been able to select for their mates without any consideration of resources until a very brief period of history. And the birth control pill and condoms completely refute this logic too, you think these females are looking for some wagie code monkey of their own race? Fuck no, they want tall handsome dudes to have fun times with. There is no media for your race, sorry Goldstein, Jonah Hill and kikeal cera will never be attractive no matter how much you push the good jew boys in your kosher productions

 

[QuantativeAnalyticalBS]

>Arabs are caucasian LOL.

Tell that to anyone living in 15th century, some Arabs semi look white today because of the mixing between Crusades and slave trading mainly concentrated in the Levant and coastal Anatolia

Europeans and arabs are the same racial group you absolute tit.

Where is the proof that they did,? Women have traits of "selecting" for the survival of her and her offspring, this has nothing to do with muh eugenics. They were either the property of men, a harem, or in a transactional relationship in the form of modern society until very recently. War bride theory completely disputes any of these cope claims

Low status men will try and maintain control over women by surpressing their choice hence your reference to them being their "property". The men who had harems had the intellectually capacity to rise to the top and outcompete their rival and thus had superior genes. These men didn't not force women into the harem, I know you're thinking that LOL. They attracted them with their superior status or initally with their physical markers signalling superior health and strength. All long term relations ARE transactional.

So what explains the prevelance of AMWF in the States then? Prevelance of American GIs cleaning up with japanese brides, boomers in Vietnam, etc? You just contradicted your own word salad, by this logic then modern females should be sticking with their own kind but this is clearly not the case retard. Instead they choose "high value" men aka what makes their pussy tingle, which can be any race but due to global hypergamy its usually whites. And dont cope and say muh exploitation or ricecuck headcanon, again, these women choose these men because they simply look better than their men or for better economic opportunites. In any other period of history they would be captured as sex slaves or forced into submission

Not at all. It's not my fault that you've failed to comprehend my argument. I will reiterate.

Women will stick to their men as long as it benefits them. The prevalence of WMAF in America is down to the superior socio-economic status of white America men, it is not attraction based (chart bellow.) Asian american's are stratified all across America, unless asian women date their brother, of course they're going to be open to the advances of white men. A significant portion of Vietnamese women took up arms and fought against the Americans. There are within group differences in life history and thus women on the extreme ends, have different modes of selecting a mate because they're evolved to different selection pressures.

And there we have it everyone, an oofy doofy proponent. Either a fed or a ricecel. Again, they were with males that werent Chads because there was no access to the technology we have today, and survival was of more importance than having a pretty boy face. This is what happens when gynocentrists try to analyze female behavior, it doesn't work because females have NEVER been able to select for their mates without any consideration of resources until a very brief period of history. And the birth control pill and condoms completely refute this logic too, you think these females are looking for some wagie code monkey of their own race? Fuck no, they want tall handsome dudes to have fun times with. There is no media for your race, sorry Goldstein, Jonah Hill and kikeal cera will never be attractive no matter how much you push the good jew boys in your kosher productions

The men in hunter gatherer tribes who HAD all of the resources, they were the genetically supeiror males, hence women's evolved psychology to detect good genes. Hunter gatherer tribes, which accounted for 99.9% of human evolution, the males like yourself are too weak and inferior to force your will on the females in said tribe without having your neck snapped by the top guys. I have no doubt this changed when civilization enabled low status males within human structured environments to suppress and forced women in said structures to be married to them by stripping their ability to move around and select what they want. They were suppressing female mate choice. In hunter gatherer tribes, women selected who they desired and they went after men who have the best genetics overall e.g Chad, or the current chief who has all of the resources and status in said tribe.

Oofy doofy is a fact. It is you who is ignorant on this subject and has failed to comprehend the significance of it. If the media and society has been structured in a way to give a certain type of male a leg up, whether he's short, tall, bald or black, he'll enjoy an artificial privilege which will enhance his reproductive success because of his superior ecconomic status.

And the birth control pill and condoms completely refute this logic too, you think these females are looking for some wagie code monkey of their own race? Fuck no, they want tall handsome dudes to have fun times with.

Women are pragmatic and aren't looking to have fun. They throw themselves at Chads with the hope that he'll romantically get involved once he's finished fucking her. They are literally throwing all their chips at Chad when they're young and their best looking with the hope that Chad will commitment to them. Once this strategy fails, they look to you and I to pick up the broken pieces. That's why the birth rate is so fucked up.

Again, a woman doesn't have to be attracted to a male for a relationship and offspring from said relation to take place.

 

[BeardedUnicorn]

Europeans and arabs are the same racial group you absolute tit.




Low status men will try and maintain control over women by surpressing their choice hence your reference to them being their "property". The men who had harems had the intellectually capacity to rise to the top and outcompete their rival and thus had superior genes. These men didn't not force women into the harem, I know you're thinking that LOL. They attracted them with their superior status or initally with their physical markers signalling superior health and strength. All long term relations ARE transactional.








Not at all. It's not my fault that you've failed to comprehend my argument. I will reiterate.

Women will stick to their men as long as it benefits them. The prevalence of WMAF in America is down to the superior socio-economic status of white America men, it is not attraction based (chart bellow.) Asian american's are stratified all across America, unless asian women date their brother, of course they're going to be open to the advances of white men. A significant portion of Vietnamese women took up arms and fought against the Americans. There are within group differences in life history and thus women on the extreme ends, have different modes of selecting a mate because they're evolved to different selection pressures.


View attachment 5490

The men in hunter gatherer tribes who HAD all of the resources, they were the genetically supeiror males, hence women's evolved psychology to detect good genes. Hunter gatherer tribes, which accounted for 99.9% of human evolution, the males like yourself are too weak and inferior to force your will on the females in said tribe without having your neck snapped by the top guys. I have no doubt this changed when civilization enabled low status males within human structured environments to suppress and forced women in said structures to be married to them by stripping their ability to move around and select what they want. They were suppressing female mate choice. In hunter gatherer tribes, women selected who they desired and they went after men who have the best genetics overall e.g Chad, or the current chief who has all of the resources and status in said tribe.

Oofy doofy is a fact. It is you who is ignorant on this subject and has failed to comprehend the significance of it. If the media and society has been structured in a way to give a certain type of male a leg up, whether he's short, tall, bald or black, he'll enjoy an artificial privilege which will enhance his reproductive success because of his superior ecconomic status.


Women are pragmatic and aren't looking to have fun. They throw themselves at Chads with the hope that he'll romantically get involved once he's finished fucking her. They are literally throwing all their chips at Chad when they're young and their best looking with the hope that Chad will commitment to them. Once this strategy fails, they look to you and I to pick up the broken pieces. That's why the birth rate is so fucked up.

Again, a woman doesn't have to be attracted to a male for a relationship and offspring from said relation to take place.

>Europeans and arabs are the same racial group you absolute tit.

I didn't say they werent categorically but to make they claim that somehow women are loyal to the tribe because of this is absolutely brain dead. If this were the case you would see middle eastern guys having high smv for white females but there is no evidence to suggest this. Explain why pajeets and blacks also worship white women then with your logic. or why kpop stars get surgery to mimic white features and put on blue contacts, and why ethnic girls always are self hating because of darker skin


>Low status men will try and maintain control over women by surpressing their choice hence your reference to them being their "property". The men who had harems had the intellectually capacity to rise to the top and outcompete their rival and thus had superior genes. These men didn't not force women into the harem, I know you're thinking that LOL. They attracted them with their superior status or initally with their physical markers signalling superior health and strength. All long term relations ARE transactional.

One look at history completely disproves this, men would wage wars and conquer women and force them into harems or they would get them through resources, which in pre historic times were much more difficult to obtain. Females had little agency in this. Its true that these things can be predetermined through genetics but again there is no society in existence where women are picking and choosing who they mate with until now. If the theory holds up then balding scientists with high iq and resource abilities would be at the top and women would be creaming over them but this is not true.

>Not at all. It's not my fault that you've failed to comprehend my argument. I will reiterate. Women will stick to their men as long as it benefits them. The prevalence of WMAF in America is down to the superior socio-economic status of white America men, it is not attraction based (chart bellow.) Asian american's are stratified all across America, unless asian women date their brother, of course they're going to be open to the advances of white men. A significant portion of Vietnamese women took up arms and fought against the Americans. There are within group differences in life history and thus women on the extreme ends, have different modes of selecting a mate because they're evolved to different selection pressures.

Asian males make significantly more than their white counterparts and they live in communities that have similar makeups. By this logic WMAF should be non existent in the Bay Area but it is the most common type of relationship you will come across.

>The men in hunter gatherer tribes who HAD all of the resources, they were the genetically supeiror males, hence women's evolved psychology to detect good genes. Hunter gatherer tribes, which accounted for 99.9% of human evolution, the males like yourself are too weak and inferior to force your will on the females in said tribe without having your neck snapped by the top guys. I have no doubt this changed when civilization enabled low status males within human structured environments to suppress and forced women in said structures to be married to them by stripping their ability to move around and select what they want. They were suppressing female mate choice. In hunter gatherer tribes, women selected who they desired and they went after men who have the best genetics overall e.g Chad, or the current chief who has all of the resources and status in said tribe.

What? If this was the case females would be just as strong and fast as men and can ward them off if they were meant to select for their mates. So which is it, physical prowess or intellectual capacity? The warchief would just horde all the women and it would be an ugly ogre over gymcel caveman, not some prettyboy twink. Also speak for yourself ricenigger, even if you are 6'4 white its absolutely pathetic you can't get any females. You would fail in any society and be a castrated slave

>Oofy doofy is a fact. It is you who is ignorant on this subject and has failed to comprehend the significance of it. If the media and society has been structured in a way to give a certain type of male a leg up, whether he's short, tall, bald or black, he'll enjoy an artificial privilege which will enhance his reproductive success because of his superior ecconomic status.

Has to be low iq or troll and not worth addressing

>Women are pragmatic and aren't looking to have fun. They throw themselves at Chads with the hope that he'll romantically get involved once he's finished fucking her. They are literally throwing all their chips at Chad when they're young and their best looking with the hope that Chad will commitment to them. Once this strategy fails, they look to you and I to pick up the broken pieces. That's why the birth rate is so fucked up.

True but how does this prove oofy doofy theory? Also that is not why the BR is fucked up theres tons of other reasons. Again if women were the arbitrars of muh eugenics then clearly these positive traits would be manifesting in society but any metric measuring intelligence is down in the shitter. Women are also just capable of producing dysgenic people as men, but gynocentrists dont like this fact. With this framework a 2/10 female producing with a 9/10 chad is muh eugenics....and by the logic of your oofy doofy theory its the betabux reproducing then its clearly not the aggressive dominant features that allowed men to form harems aka muh chads (which in hunter gatherer were the ogrecels).


>Again, a woman doesn't have to be attracted to a male for a relationship and offspring from said relation to take place.

Only factual statement but contradicts everything you said above

 

[QuantativeAnalyticalBS]

I didn't say they werent categorically but to make they claim that somehow women are loyal to the tribe because of this is absolutely brain dead.

Most men aren't exactly loyal either as evident with what's happened in Europe with whites siding with the Jews over their own for monetary gains. But under harsher conditions, people like the aforementioned and yourself wouldn't number in such a significant portion of the white population and would be purified by natural selection out of the genepool!

Explain why pajeets and blacks also worship white women then with your logic. or why kpop stars get surgery to mimic white features and put on blue contacts, and why ethnic girls always are self hating because of darker skin

You're a simple fuck who's unable to figure out such trivial factors. You clearly have no understanding of this subject. I suggest for you to stop replying because it's clear to anyone that you don't know shit. I'll give you a hint, STATUS.

One look at history completely disproves this, men would wage wars and conquer women and force them into harems or they would get them through resources, which in pre historic times were much more difficult to obtain. Females had little agency in this. Its true that these things can be predetermined through genetics but again there is no society in existence where women are picking and choosing who they mate with until now. If the theory holds up then balding scientists with high iq and resource abilities would be at the top and women would be creaming over them but this is not true.

That's not entirely true. Women during the Vietnam war and in many other cultures openly fought against the American's to protect their villages. Again, the life history of the female is what's important. As those who have less genetic similarity with their tribe are more likely to betray it and side with outside groups when times get hard.

Wrong again. Good looking men with good genes don't have to force women to be with them because women are willingly going with them. When the vikings came ashore in England, many English women willingly came aboard their ships and left with them because they found them to be good looking and strong. They didn't have to rape women, because women wanted them. Low status, manlets who're genetic garbage use civilization to suppress female mate choice by restricting their movement and freedom of choice. Again, in hunter gatherer tribes, women selected for the top guys and the bottom 40% of men got nothing and couldn't do shit about it.

Asian males make significantly more than their white counterparts and they live in communities that have similar makeups. By this logic WMAF should be non existent in the Bay Area but it is the most common type of relationship you will come across.

White men founded modernity and created the United States of America, dumbbass!

What? If this was the case females would be just as strong and fast as men and can ward them off if they were meant to select for their mates. So which is it, physical prowess or intellectual capacity? The warchief would just horde all the women and it would be an ugly ogre over gymcel caveman, not some prettyboy twink. Also speak for yourself ricenigger, even if you are 6'4 white its absolutely pathetic you can't get any females. You would fail in any society and be a castrated slave

Women willingly submit themselves to the top guys and there's nothing you or any other subhuman male can do about it. They didn't need to be strong or fast because they submitted to the men who were and they protected their women as their own property! Chads aren't pretty boys, you tit.

Has to be low iq or troll and not worth addressing

You're very ill researched. It's a proven fact by Darwin that the aforementioned strategy alters the geneflow in a population via man made artificial selection.

True but how does this prove oofy doofy theory? Also that is not why the BR is fucked up theres tons of other reasons. Again if women were the arbitrars of muh eugenics then clearly these positive traits would be manifesting in society but any metric measuring intelligence is down in the shshitter

Because Jews are maladaptively socially engineering the West and manipulating female mate selection. It's hilarious how you failed to see this. All social movements were funded and led by Jews! DUH.

Only factual statement but contradicts everything you said above

How does it contradict what I've said. You don't even understand female nature.