Why not take r/K selection theory into account? It makes perfect evolutionary sense:
Personally, I think it would be healthy to accept the fact that not everyone here is biologically programmed to engage in r-behavior. Some want to collect 100s of notches and 10s of flags, others want to be patriarchs and have 3 kids and spend the next 20 years raising them to be good people. There's enough room for both types. The friction begins when K-types start chastising r-types, and r-types start ridiculing K-types.
More interestingly, men will probably oscillate between the two extremes. The transition from one type of behavior to the other must be triggered by testosterone, I suspect.
- r-selection consists of "spray & pray", i.e., a man tries to fuck and impregnate as many women as possible, then invests very little time and money in his children. Most children will fail, some may even die, but a few will survive and procreate profusively. Think of rats, rabbits, and über-alpha psychopaths like Genghis Khan.
- K-selection is the other extreme, i.e., a man chooses a woman carefully, commits to her, has few kids, and invests as much as possible in the few kids he has, to maximize the kids' chances of success. Think of decadent SWPL'ers.
Personally, I think it would be healthy to accept the fact that not everyone here is biologically programmed to engage in r-behavior. Some want to collect 100s of notches and 10s of flags, others want to be patriarchs and have 3 kids and spend the next 20 years raising them to be good people. There's enough room for both types. The friction begins when K-types start chastising r-types, and r-types start ridiculing K-types.
More interestingly, men will probably oscillate between the two extremes. The transition from one type of behavior to the other must be triggered by testosterone, I suspect.
"The great secret of happiness in love is to be glad that the other fellow married her." – H.L. Mencken