Why do Normies always blame men for their lack of dating?

Post Reply New Topic

This is where we disagree completely. It's not a conscious process. Instincts control our behaviour at a sub conscious level, it is not something you can simply rise above completely by thinking a certain way.

I think this where people misinterpret what I am saying. Because it seems like people here think, that I think, that women are consciously evil and it's all a big conspiracy. That's not what I think. I am saying that women(and men)are driven by instincts they for the most part don't even understand or recognize, let alone control.

Yes, but you were implying that humans were naturally two-ways polygamous (hence why your bonobo reference), this is not true; human's ancient mating systems leaned to polygyny more than to polyandry. And polygyny system = alpha male system.

No, I'm claiming humans are individuals and there's more to mating preference than any of the labels presented here, the labels are merely social constructs to validate a pre-existing belief.

Everything I don't like is a social construct, or a nazi, whichever on any given day.

Ascribing characteristics to a person because of skin color is a social construct, and a false one at that.

So black people are not generally better at basketball than white people?

I think maybe a very tall white guy may actually be better than a very short black guy.

Poor women can date up and thus have more options then poor men, they may even escape poverty this way.

Last edited by sly279 on 14 Sep 2017, 4:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I don't think black people are innately better at basketball than white people.

In the US, the average black person is actually a bit shorter than the average white person.

zydrunas ilgauskas ? Lol

But I don't think it's a coincidence that the majority of NBA players are black - despite them being a minority of the general population.

Basketball has become more of a part of the culture of the US "inner city" than either baseball and football.

It's similar to "association football," also known as "soccer" in Brazil. It's a similar sort of obsession.

+1. Learned behavior > genetics.

edit: take Kobe Bryant (not a fan btw), you think he was good just because he's black, or because he spent four hours on the court every day even in the off season when all his competitors were on vacation?

His name actually is Žydrūnas, btw.

Just to give you a brief explanation on bonobos evolution, I think it's a story I've watched or read somewhere but you can search it yourself:
Bonobos and Common chimps evolved from a common ancestor, the common ancestor was probably socially closer to the common chimps today than to bonobo (patriarchal).

The area where the ancestors of bonobos lived, went into a lengthened period of drought, for some reason this brought death to the ancestors of gorillas who couldn't adapt to this climate change; yet this brought peace to the 'ancient' chimps living there, chimps and gorillas were always in a state of 'war' over resources. The absence of the gorillas means that the male aggression/dominance in chimps is no longer evolutionary advantageous and other traits became advantageous and may got naturally selected instead in the newer situation (ie. such as niceness and willing to help others during the drought) this shaped them over the years into what we know as bonobos today.

Now, if we look at humans and their ancestors, there's no evidence that humans went through a such peaceful and non-warring long period of time, that would be possible if the ancestors of 'humans' evolved at a certain phase in a narrow geographical area isolated from dangerous species and all living together in harmony (no tribal, no warring, like in the case of bonobos) before becoming homo sapiens. (because studies show that homo sapiens were an ever expanding species geographically).

The history of the homo sapiens though doesn't reflect a peaceful nature of humans though, especially male humans, the 'fighter class' of ancient human tribes were often males, armies were mostly males.

In fact, our facial structure are more 'fighting equipped' than those of the chimps and bonobos today.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 093610.htm

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 15 Sep 2017, 8:22 am, edited 1 time in total.