Evolution and Male Disposability

[Golgotha777Participant 326]

Men are undeniably superior to women in strength, stamina, and intelligence. The question is why.

If some of you remember that stat that historically for every 10 women, 1 man reproduced or something like that. This means that there was much greater selective pressure on picking the “optimal male gene sets” for survival and reproduction.

So this evolutionary pressure is attached to the Y chromosome exclusively. It’s a very simple explanation of male superiority on average. Our superiority is precisely linked to our disposability. Having such a wide disparity between losers and winners in the reproductive game is part and parcel of our sexually dimorphic nature.

If you ever need an explanation or justification in an argument about male superiority in general, this is a good one.

[ghostParticipant]

Excellent post, Golgotha. I already have plenty of real life experience to know that I am superior to a woman in almost everything. The only thing she is better than me at is lying and manipulation. I have no desire to beat her at that game. I prefer to stay above the pettiness. My ancestors and my Creator are watching me. I will not let them down.

[Golgotha777Participant 326]

The ironic thing is that female selection itself created male superiority over evolutionary history which they are now bitching about.

[ghostParticipant]

Golgotha777 wrote:

The ironic thing is that female selection itself created male superiority over evolutionary history which they are now bitching about.

They don’t read history, bro. They only read internet memes on Facebook at best. They are base level creatures.

[Golgotha777Participant 326]

Yeah, like Patrice O’Neil used say, “they don’t have to be bigger than their pussies.”

It’s definitely genetic, i.e. not fixable.

[ghostParticipant]

Golgotha777 wrote:

It’s definitely genetic, i.e. not fixable.

It’s not. My own mother admits to this.

[Can’t Stump TrumpParticipant]

Women have only a few eggs, while men produce billions of sperm. Furthermore, there is no limit to the number of women that one man can impregnate, whereas a woman can be impregnated by only one man every nine months. The result? Men are so good at what they do, and women so bad, that you only need a handful of men to perform the reproductive function, but you need a lot of women to perform theirs.

It’s precisely because we’re so good at what we do that most of us are disposable.

Women are better at multitasking? Fucking up several things at once is not multitasking.

[ghostParticipant]

Can’t Stump Trump wrote:

It’s precisely because we’re so good at what we do that most of us are disposable.

Survival of the fittest is still at work. High value men always find a way to separate themselves from the herd.

[AwakenedParticipant 35200]

Off topic, but related.

The westernized world has been f~~~ing up Human evolution for some time.

We reward the lowest elements of society/gene pool for reproducing while the successful members have been choosing to either NOT reproduce or reproduce at a rate less than even replacement.

For example, take the average crack HOE that has given birth to around ten crack babies, each child being sired by a crack addict baby daddy or the like. Each time she loses the child to state care, but her state benefits do not decrease along the way. If she can keep any for any length of time, she gets a bump in her monthly check. She has the crack baby which negatively adds to the gene pool, and goes back out and repeats the behavior. There’s also just the regular ghetto HOE that collects kids for the sake of the monthly check.

The doctor that delivers the baby is maybe father of one to two children.

Just how many decades can this be done throughout western societies ??

In a World of Justin Beibers Be a Johnny Cash

[ghostParticipant]

Awakened wrote:

Just how many decades can this be done throughout western societies ??

Two more decades.

[Anonymous 5]

Golgotha777 wrote:

Our superiority is precisely linked to our disposability.

Brilliantly simple logic. Savage but true.
There’s far less selective pressure on women because, as we know, they can all get a f~~~. Therefore women have historically passed on their genes regardless of quality.
It takes Darwin’s survival of the fittest to it’s inevitable outcome that only the best of the best of male genes have been passed on throughout history.

The welfare state is indeed breeding idiocy.
It doesn’t matter how ugly, stupid or mentally incompetent a woman is, all she has to do is get f~~~ed to multiply her genes.
On the contrary, people who are competent, successful and hard working are increasingly turned off having children because of the enormous cost.

The more successful a man is in the western world, the more likely he’ll be targeted by our western gynocentric system, therefore the more the very best of men are avoiding relationships let alone passing on their genes.

Civilization collapse is nature’s way of re-balancing the gene pool.

[ghostParticipant]

Anonymous wrote:

It takes Darwin’s survival of the fittest to it’s inevitable outcome that only the best of the best of male genes have been passed on throughout history.

Mine won’t be passed on. It’s really unfortunate.

[MaddladParticipant 765]

Yep, been saying for years that society is getting dumber by the day as the smart people arent breeding and its all the lower socio-economic demographic that are. We’re f~~~ed basically.

[Author]

Posts