Have you every thought what would happen if all men were equal?

[Pumax]

What if all men were equal, and none of them had an advantage?
Same height, thick hair, muscles, money, status, etc.
You get the idea.

If getting women is a harsh competition every man play his entire life, if all men were normalized, and therefore men had no advantage/disadvantage over other men, what would they be chosen by women?
At this point, what would make a woman say "I'd pick him" over another?

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

I've thought about questions like this a lot and after thinking it through I realized this is impossible on a fundamental level.

The idea of "equalizing" ANYTHING actually kind of defies the nature of reality. The pareto principle seems to occur with everything from wealth/mate success even seems to apply to cosmology. It really is a natural law of sorts.

The biggest problem with this question is that it is simply impossible for everyone or everything to be exceptional - if everyone is exceptional then no one is. At the moment every man is made "equal", the system would quickly self-correct. Society would simply determine new metrics and standards to seperate the the wheat from the chaff - they may be real positive traits that people work towards, or completely made up and arbitrary - that's how sexual selection works. Sexual selection is literally mother nature.

 

[BaronOfHair]

We've kinda sorta experimented with this already:

Social media has given EVERYONE a pulpit from which to endlessly espouse their own theories on just about everything, rarely having their thinking interrogated for accuracy in the comments section... The Manosphere may just be the most glaring example of this.End result:

Fellas who recently as The 2000s would've just been the jackass down at the bar, terrorizing everyone in earshot with his pathetic stabs at trying to APPEAR like the smartest guy in the room, are now being mistaken for the resurrection of Spinoza and David Hume

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

Fellas who recently as The 2000s would've just been the jackass down at the bar, terrorizing everyone in earshot with his pathetic stabs at trying to APPEAR like the smartest guy in the room, are now being mistaken for the resurrection of Spinoza and David Hume

i feel attacked

 

[Prepostereax]

It would come down to opportunity, ie proximity and logistics

 

[Tilex]

You would still need experience & knowledge.
By that scenario, not all men would have the same knowledge or the same experience.
Therefore there would be a large majority of blue pill guys amongst a minority of red pill guys.

The good news is, the concept behind alpha male & beta male would be nonexistent.
It would strictly be red pill vs blue pill.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

No because it will never happen

 

[Slowhandluke]

What if all men were equal, and none of them had an advantage?
Same height, thick hair, muscles, money, status, etc.
You get the idea.

If getting women is a harsh competition every man play his entire life, if all men were normalized, and therefore men had no advantage/disadvantage over other men, what would they be chosen by women?
At this point, what would make a woman say "I'd pick him" over another?

imagine a world without George Washington, Medal of honor recipients, guys with the "right stuff", Newton, Pascal, Einstein, etc...

If men are equal, society would collapse... just like societies that believe in communism..how would the dating field be like? look at the USSR, Venezuela, etc.. how were/are the dating scene there? These countries tried their best to be "equal"... it seems as society becomes more "equal" for men, women dont get to choose. Men chose who hooks up with who.. who their daughters date.. what the elders say a guy should marry or date..

If you want to see how society would be like if men were equal, just look at how Islam treats their women. If men are going to be equal, that would necessitate that men help each other to be equal. men cannot compete with each other in this "equal" society. Its contrary to the whole idea of competition. No competition means women are "doled" out to men. Just like Islam or the Amish, etc...

 

[BillyPilgrim]

Women would have men stand in a circle, spin some kind of wheel with a pointer, and wherever it landed that man would be deemed infinitely superior to the rest, as if ordained by God or something.

 

[Pumax]

No competition means women are "doled" out to men. Just like Islam or the Amish, etc...

This actually doesn't seems to be so bad

 

[Slowhandluke]

This actually doesn't seems to be so bad

Yes, and no.. For genetic diversity, it's better that young people choose for themselves (inbreeding is a big deal in islam, same in the Amish community). However, when young people choose for themselves without limits or guidance, we have our current situation - dating apocalypse, more lonely women, more singles, etc. etc...

Arranged marriages seems to be closer to the ideal. Less divorce, couples are happier. Usually, arranged marriages have the input of both families and some input from the young people. It's not as rigid as most western feminist would make it seem to be. I speculate most of the history of the USA (and Europe),informal arranged marriages was the majority -- or even the norm. After all, it was normal and expected that the young man had to ask the dad for the woman's hand in marriage.. Often, the father could reject and he did when he thought the young man was not a good fit.

 

[zekko]

You left out intelligence and personality, but I'm going to assume that's covered under the "etc.".

So I would say men would be chosen from common interests probably (including religion), and logistics (guys who live close by, work similar hours, whatever makes seeing each other more convenient).