Women initially were mono(?)gamous and men were..?

[sosousage]

Other thread popped where someone suggested women were naturally monogamous (one partner) rather than polygamous (plenty partners).

But is it true? And what about men, are we really monogamous if we can basically impregnate different woman everyday?

Also penis looks like a mushroom, I heard more than once throughout my life that people (cavemen) were grouping to gangbang single woman (cavewoman) so this way if 20 peoples bang her, only the strongest sperm will make it (meaning the born child will be some sort of super-human), and the mushroom form is so it can take out sperm of your competitors.

If what I write here is right then how are women monogamous? And what men are?

 

[sosousage]

Women are hypergamous, so they tend to want only the best man they can get and don't want the beta sperm polluting her future genetic offspring.

However, since it is difficult to find a good genetics, and good provider combo in the same male, they often will utilize a two-fold strategy known as alpha fux, beta bucks.

Yes I know they are hypergamous, but hypergamy inherits from monogamy, its literally boosted monogamy, since now testosteronized males and housecaring/rich males are two different things so instead of one male they often are forced (or they force themselves) to have at least 2 males.

However you can clearly see the monogamy doesnt exist in the theory i wrote above.

 

[marmel75]

Other thread popped where someone suggested women were naturally monogamous (one partner) rather than polygamous (plenty partners).

But is it true? And what about men, are we really monogamous if we can basically impregnate different woman everyday?

Also penis looks like a mushroom, I heard more than once throughout my life that people (cavemen) were grouping to gangbang single woman (cavewoman) so this way if 20 peoples bang her, only the strongest sperm will make it (meaning the born child will be some sort of super-human), and the mushroom form is so it can take out sperm of your competitors.

If what I write here is right then how are women monogamous? And what men are?

No its not true even in the animal kingdom...while the alpha male typically mates with multiple females, those females also have their "other" males they are banging on the side when the alpha is not around. However its dangerous for the other male because if he is caught he could get killed by the alpha or thrown out and be forced to live on his own.

If you want to know true nature and instincts look at animals. We have the same instincts however our instincts to do what we are "told" by them get clouded by reasoning...animals have no such issue.

 

[sosousage]

No its not true even in the animal kingdom...while the alpha male typically mates with multiple females, those females also have their "other" males they are banging on the side when the alpha is not around. However its dangerous for the other male because if he is caught he could get killed by the alpha or thrown out and be forced to live on his own.

If you want to know true nature and instincts look at animals. We have the same instincts however our instincts to do what we are "told" by them get clouded by reasoning...animals have no such issue.

I see. I guess I believed something from untrusted source. Thanks for clearing it up.

 

[marmel75]

I see. I guess I believed something from untrusted source. Thanks for clearing it up.

It was long thought that was the case but when researchers started watching more closely they found out it was not.

 

[RichardTheFrog]

We should start a subsection of this forum called...

"Theorizing About Cavemen"

 

[sosousage]

It was long thought that was the case but when researchers started watching more closely they found out it was not.

So males are also monogamous?

 

[The Duke]

I question how much of what happened during caveman times even applies today. Mankind has evolved and you have to take that into account. Females don't have to rely on men these days, that all started changing in the 60's. These days the only thing a woman needs is a man to bust a nut in a test tube so the sperm can be used to impregnate her. She can make her own money and gather her own goods/resources. If she doesn't want a baby, then she technically has no use for a man and this is why there is so much chaos within relationships these days.

 

[marmel75]

So males are also monogamous?

No males are not. Females were thought to be but are not. Even in animals that "mate for life" they have side flings.

 

[marmel75]

I question how much of what happened during caveman times even applies today. Mankind has evolved and you have to take that into account. Females don't have to rely on men these days, that all started changing in the 60's. These days the only thing a woman needs is a man to bust a nut in a test tube so the sperm can be used to impregnate her. She can make her own money and gather her own goods/resources. If she doesn't want a baby, then she technically has no use for a man and this is why there is so much chaos within relationships these days.

The same instincts and hormones they had then we still have now.

The urges havent changed. They can rationalize them away for a while but eventually they will succumb to what nature wants.

 

[sosousage]

The same instincts and hormones they had then we still have now.

The urges havent changed. They can rationalize them away for a while but eventually they will succumb to what nature wants.

so group sex theory is a lie, but do you think is it actually possible to create super human this way

(i find this part very interesting)

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

Mankind has evolved and you have to take that into account. Females don't have to rely on men these days, that all started changing in the 60's.

This is so false. You cannot undo hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years of evolution in just 60 years. It does not happen unless by a rapid extinction event. All women are doing today are acting on the instincts they had for mellenia.

No males are not. Females were thought to be but are not. Even in animals that "mate for life" they have side flings.

In the rest of the animal kingdom, monogamy still DOES exist. It’s just limited, meaning that they are only monogamous for the mating season really, or however long it takes for them to raise their offspring. Humans are the same way. The reason why the idea of monogamy existed as ‘life long’ partners instead of just for as long as it takes for humans to survive is because of many reasons. The first one is that our offspring take incredibly long to mature relative to other animals. Longer time to mature means longer time before one can take care of him or her self. Secondly, since civilization began (Mesopotamians, Babylonians, Assyrians, etc.), our offspring lived with us for an even longer time due to our ever-increasing complexity in social dynamics and education (human social structure is the most complex of any other species in the world). The third reason is just that we live longer. When there’s an alpha male of a group, you don’t challenge them unless they get too old or can no longer be the alpha anymore. Well with humans, we live longer than almost every other terrestrial animal out there aside from tortoises and maybe a few others that are probably at or near extinction. And because we live for a longer time, the alpha male remains the alpha for a longer time because he is able to remain in better condition for a longer period of time. Monogamy does exist, just not the way that most people think it does.

so group sex theory is a lie, but do you think is it actually possible to create super human this way

(i find this part very interesting)

There’s nothing that ‘group banging’ can do that evolution already hasn’t done. It’s already unnatural to have threesomes or moresomes with one woman and multiple men, that just means that the woman has mental problems. The whole mushroom tip bull**** is just the way our penis forms when we are an androgynous/undifferentiated fetus. Of course, no one actually knows this or will even guess that this is what it is simply because of the whole gender identity bull****.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

false. the human males penis shape serves a specific set of evolutionary functions.

long story short, the "head" evolved in order to basically displace another mans sperm during intercourse

the size, in terms of length and girth, serves to release sperm deep into the most inaccessible of places while girth serves to expand the vagina. effectively putting men with smaller penises at a disadvantage for sperm displacement.

now taking all of this and the fact that sperm can basically survive for a few days inside a woman, what does that tell us about human sexuality and mating strategies?

"monogamy" is a social construct. nothing more, nothing less.

Not that I’m saying that it’s a coincidence, but man that theory just seems so far fetched. I’d think that the shape would still be different because if that really were the case, there are definitely more efficient ways at removing another man semen or something. I just don’t buy that whole story. Maybe it is a coincidence via genetic drift or hitchhiking or something because that just seems so far out there. Anal sex only began to happen the past few centuries really (and even that’s a generous amount), so I just don’t see how it happens.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

false. the human males penis shape serves a specific set of evolutionary functions.

long story short, the "head" evolved in order to basically displace another mans sperm during intercourse

the size, in terms of length and girth, serves to release sperm deep into the most inaccessible of places while girth serves to expand the vagina. effectively putting men with smaller penises at a disadvantage for sperm displacement.

now taking all of this and the fact that sperm can basically survive for a few days inside a woman, what does that tell us about human sexuality and mating strategies?

"monogamy" is a social construct. nothing more, nothing less.

I’m thinking about it more, it would also mean that jealousy and competition would never have existed. But they do. It’s just too far-fetched an idea. Just like how dogs supposedly hump each other regardless of sex, the fags will tell you how it means that being gay is natural (even though it clearly isn’t). Plus, no one would know who the father is, which means that no one will raise the child (even though believers will say how the whole group will; rubbish). And it’s not like it’s very hard to get a woman pregnant either, so the ‘more sperm = more likely to get pregnant’ theory is bull**** as well. There’s way too many things that the theory doesn’t explain.

 

[The Duke]

@ImTheDoubleGreatest!

Mankind has evolved and you have to take that into account. Females don't have to rely on men these days, that all started changing in the 60's.

If you think my above statement is false, name one thing women need to rely on men for these days? And I've already mentioned sperm production being the only thing. There is nothing else.

 

[RichardTheFrog]

@ImTheDoubleGreatest!

Mankind has evolved and you have to take that into account. Females don't have to rely on men these days, that all started changing in the 60's.

If you think my above statement is false, name one thing women need to rely on men for these days? And I've already mentioned sperm production being the only thing. There is nothing else.

Did you know they can produce sperm in a lab from skin cells.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/phys.org/news/2016-04-scientists-skin-cells-human-sperm.amp

But fact is, all this feminist garbage is unnatural and why the world/dating world is so fvcked up.

I will never understand why some pu$$y hipster guys are doing well.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

@ImTheDoubleGreatest!

Mankind has evolved and you have to take that into account. Females don't have to rely on men these days, that all started changing in the 60's.

If you think my above statement is false, name one thing women need to rely on men for these days? And I've already mentioned sperm production being the only thing. There is nothing else.

For everything. They can not manipulate each other into doing things for each other because they cannot effectively do anything for themselves. They need men to do it for them.

 

[The Duke]

For everything. They can not manipulate each other into doing things for each other because they cannot effectively do anything for themselves. They need men to do it for them.

And what is it that females can not effectively do? I know a few that can change their own oil, change a tire, mow their own yard, hang their own pictures on the wall. I know many that make $75,000 or more per year. I know many that own homes. Many can afford to hire someone to do what they physically can't. Women aren't just for making babies and standing over a stove anymore.

BTW females manipulate each other all the time. They are just as flakey with other females as they are with us. My sister is constantly asking me why females behave like they do! lol.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

And what is it that females can not effectively do? I know a few that can change their own oil, change a tire, mow their own yard, hang their own pictures on the wall. I know many that make $75,000 or more per year. I know many that own homes. Many can afford to hire someone to do what they physically can't. Women aren't just for making babies and standing over a stove anymore.

BTW females manipulate each other all the time. They are just as flakey with other females as they are with us. My sister is constantly asking me why females behave like they do! lol.

Efficiency. That’s what I am saying. A woman doing the same amount of work as a man will have a bigger toll taken on her than said man. They age more quickly, become much more irritable, and they become more cruel. Men don’t become this way except through extreme circumstances. But regular stress of just working more than 40 hours a week for a little while and they start to change quite a bit from what I’ve seen. They don’t handle stress well. And that’s also why they’ve become b!tchier than they used to be; they’re taking on the stresses and responsibilities that men have.

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

Both women and men CAN BE monogamous when it's the only option.

But whenever possible, women are hypergamous (better sperm) and men are polygamous (more seeds planted) when possible.

Just like we can eat anything, and pretty much live anywhere, humans are the OMNI-animal.

We tend to use the best strategy available at the time.

Any women that has an opportunity (from an instinctive genetic level) to get better sperm and still maintain her relationship, she will.

Any man that has an opportunity (from an instinctive genetic level) to plant his seed in different flower pots, and still maintain his relationship, he will.

Buyer beware.