Quote: (06-22-2018 04:45 PM)Eugenics Wrote:
Like I said they are co-dependant. It's obvious when you look at things like The Halo Effect. People of better genetic quality will be richer on average than those with less looks, intelligence, and cunning. But I'm basing my observation on the fact that many middle class and below women (sometimes even higher status women) will hook up and have children with felons, dregs, and other undesirables, despite the societal pressure not to. Almost as if they are being directed by by their base instincts exclusively. That success is based on genetic quality and the "bad boy" factor (agression related to testosterone is genetic and high t men are rates more attractive on average). They are sexually successful despite absence of any provider qualities whatsoever.
There's a lot of Tinder experiments that aren't so scientific but essentially prove this. I'll see if I can find them. But basically someone takes pictures of male models, admits to horrible acts that society condemns like armed robbery, pedophilia, murder, (openly on the tinder profile) and women still throw themselves at him. Not just ugly low status women either, but decent looking middle class girls. With such verocity it's almost depressing. Let me find some examples.
I doubt being a bad boy has to do with genetics (well it does, but not in the way you mean). Testosterone too. High T doesn't necessarily make you a bad boy. Plenty of church boys in the football or rugby team.
So what you are saying with "genetics" is basically physical features (looks, height etc). The reason handsome guys are doing exponentially better than everyone else on Tinder is because women only have pictures to judge from. They have to figure out a man's status from these alone. A tall, handsome guy with a six pick is their safest best.
But Tinder is not the full reality.
^ Btw I think the girls on Tinder above believe the guy to be joking. Nobody would unironically declare himself a pedophile on an internet dating app.