[ManVsMachine]

(03-19-2015 09:02 AM)Dagonet Wrote:  

On the point about periods syncing up made earlier, that phenomenon is called The McClintock Effect. The common hypothesis is that it evolved in humans because it is conducive to reproduction in a more efficient way. If a tribe of women had completely staggered fertility cycles, the men (or single alpha male) having sex with them might not time sex with that particular girl with her fertile window, since female ovulation is kept concealed moreso in humans than other species. If all women get in sync, then no matter who is fucking who during that week of ovulation, someone (or a lot of people) are getting pregnant. It might even promote giant, Bacchanalian orgies since the girls will all be at their horniest, as well as looking their best.

That would imply the culture was most similar to Roman, with classes and significantly larger populations.

This did happen, however, this was before that.

It was more like only one tribal leader, perhaps his very close relatives - brother or son - having reproductive rights over the women. the less related / unrelated men were allowed to stay around for their utility, hunting/building.


If you know the extreme manifestations of hypergamy - and its rare but its still around - you know that these other men were worth less than the spit under the women's bare feet. The effect still stands, but only a minimal amount of these very, very low class men were allowed sex.

(03-19-2015 11:22 AM)heavy Wrote:  

You know what this means bros...

We're all descendants of very, very alpha dudes

...don't disappoint your forefathers

This is cute but one thing I noticed with people educated on this subject is that we are very "Genetically Deterministic" - namely we only *consider* "ideal" genes in an isolated environment which is removed from chance. Its just as likely the biggest, strongest member of a nomadic tribe trips and breaks his ankle and suddenly becomes worthless. Human history is much more rich than we often explain it online.

[N°6]

(03-19-2015 08:58 AM)The Reactionary Tree Wrote:  

As marriage begins to crumble as an institution and our societies become more godless, we will be heading back towards that direction of playas and incels. No more pair bonding. Just one big orgy. The bonobo masturbation society.

Watch out for 'Blade Runner' sexbots in the future. A Beta-$ worker (male and female) will be given these to use to keep them satisfied while all élite women and some élite men reproduce in Hunger Wars type cities.

[Buddydowrongright]

For real though I want to get in on some of that prehistoric agricultural despot game.

[Samseau]

There is another possibility people aren't considering. What if the population of humans dipped very low in the not-so-distant past?

What if, 8,000 years ago, there were only 200,000K humans or so? Due to extreme cold or whatnot? And most men ended up dying off finding food while the women huddled in caves or something? In such a situation having 17-1 ratios of females reproducing to males is not extraordinary.

The alpha-beta thing may not be the best explanation here, way too many possibilities with weather and famine.

[getdownonit]

(03-19-2015 01:23 PM)The Father Wrote:  

(03-19-2015 12:58 PM)RIslander Wrote:  

Females didn't choose anything. The alphas decided. If an alpha wanted to bang a female, he banged her. If she fought him off he clubbed her over the head before the bang

Yes, picking up a girl with "club game" had an entirely different meaning then...

[torridon747]

I don't think 450 is a large enough sample size to make this kind of claim.

[Paracelsus]

(04-12-2018 10:11 PM)getdownonit Wrote:  

(03-19-2015 01:23 PM)The Father Wrote:  

(03-19-2015 12:58 PM)RIslander Wrote:  

Females didn't choose anything. The alphas decided. If an alpha wanted to bang a female, he banged her. If she fought him off he clubbed her over the head before the bang

Yes, picking up a girl with "club game" had an entirely different meaning then...

You mean Post of 2015?

It was a good one, though, got me chuckling.

[Hell_Is_Like_Newark]

(03-20-2015 02:23 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

There is another possibility people aren't considering. What if the population of humans dipped very low in the not-so-distant past?

What if, 8,000 years ago, there were only 200,000K humans or so? Due to extreme cold or whatnot?

There is a theory that this happened about 74k years ago due to the massive eruption of Toba in Sumatra. Per the theory, there may have been as little as 10k breeding pairs of homo sapiens left on the planet.

8k years ago the world was entering the Holocene Optimum, a period warmer than today. During this period (and previous warm periods) the Sahara desert became a land of lakes and grasslands. The last of the ice age glaciers were melting away as well. It was a good time for humanity environment wise.

[EndsExpect]

(03-19-2015 11:26 AM)JacksonRev Wrote:  

I'm pretty sure this is more a male on male thing, then a female choice thing. A woman has a son and daughter. Tribe get attacked and loses. Who do you think gets to live after being conquered?

I think Jackson Rev has the basic answer here. Tribal warfare will likely account for the breeding distortions.

It was very common to castrate male children taken as prisoners of war, meanwhile the females became slaves and produced more kids.

If you pay attention to the Bible... there is this scene in Judges where a military commander is motivating his troops by saying if they win there will be a womb for every man. That was written at least 3500 years ago, and I don't think sex slaves were a new invention back then.

It really doesn't take too many battles before you start getting a 4 to 1 male female ratio. I mean think about it. Say two tribes with equal male female ratios go to war Your 100 guys go up against the other tribes 100 guys. They lose 80 you lose 40. The losing tribes males are castrated and taken as slaves. Now you have 60 men and 200 women.