I wish I could do a male version of this, but as it is, I only have insight into the brains of my fellow women.
So let's begin now, shall we? ^^
You all heard unclear, misleading ideas men toss around like that alpha-beta crap, or lies women spread like "I just want someone nice, handsome, interesting, who likes my music, bla,bla tall, honest, confident, confident, confident, confident... Did I mention confident?"
The truth is pretty straightforward and rather simple, so let me clue you in...
Bit of Evolution For Dummies
Those in the know might be bored by evolutionary psychology, but it's short and very relevant, so please read the following.
Not to end up with a broad regurgitation of evolutionary psychology and all the nuances of the theory, I'll try to boil it down to 2 simple things:
- Intersexual selection (opposite gender selection)
- Intrasexual selection (same gender competition and intimidation)
1. Intersexual selection is sexual selection in which one gender shapes the other gender's evolution by picking members of that gender they find most preferable.
- Meaning: Men become what women need them to be and women become what men need them to be.
The gender which invests more into the offspring biologically is less open and available, therefore more influential in sexual selection. Some species have even gone extinct, or branched off into whole new species thanks to female influence.
- Meaning: Women influence men through sexual selection much more and faster than the other way around.
The gender who invests more biological resources (like bodily harm, energy, time) into offspring has a reason to be more picky and a more vested interest into looking at as many characteristics as possible with aim to monopolise them as long as it's needed.
- Meaning: Women are more choosy and more interested in monogamy than men aimed to make the best environment for their own child.
2. Intrasexual selection is sexual selection based on competition exerted over the same sex in order to eliminate them from the dating game before the opposite gender comes to interact with them.
- This is the source of all your alpha-beta male crap. Thinking that you're worthless unless on financial/social/physical top. Unless you're "alpha".
- Your penis measuring obsession. Your exaggarating with working out.
- Did you know men invented marriage? Men's tendency to become territorial applies here as well.
- Illusions that beating some man in a one-on-one fight/argument/face off, being a bi hero will somehow make you more interesting to women.
In reality, women don't give a shit. That's between you boys and trust me, we see that stuff in the same way you see competitions between women like:
- Woman on woman cattiness and resentment.
- Tendency to ignore male advice on what is attractive and pump our breasts into round, hovering water balloons, become anorexic, or wear enough make up to rival a clown.
We look silly right? Well so does your penis measuring contest. :p
Because this is not about you, this is all about how "big" that other girl is... It's about taking her out of your sight, about making her feel like less confident, about seeming to be higher in status than her...
So in evolution speak: What do women really need?
Human babies take a long time to mature into self-sustaining individuals. They require a lot of energy and care to become functional and healthy adults. The woman's entire biology is geared towards nurturing this useless little human up to a point where it can sustain itself and prolong the species.
The woman is soft, pliable, adjusted towards nurturing of the young and childbirth, more emotional, gentle, security seeking, people orientated, easily sacrificial for her young. Her main biological goal, her whole evolution shaping her body and psyche is geared towards that little creature we call a baby. She is the "last line of defense" for the child and it's her job to find the best possible "first line of defence" available. To select the best man to help her raise her children successfully. To select him and accommodate him in order to keep him around. A man whose whole evolution shaped his body and psyche geared towards both her and that little creature we call a baby.
Following will contain 3 parts:
I urge you to read chronologically.
Are women gold diggers?
It takes a lot to feed the human brain. It takes a lot of effort, time and mental skill to find easier, faster and safer access to more nutrient dense foods.
We are the most successful predators on this planet and we primarily have men to thank for it.
Ladies asked, and the gentlemen obliged.
Women needed someone to get the least accessible food, build most of the shelter, while they occupy themselves with easier tasks that allow them to simultaneously nurture the very fragile and slow developing young.
A long time ago this may have implied men being the hunters, builders and scraping one branch against the other to make fire. Maybe an animal pelt was a caveman's equivalent of a sports car.
Today this implies that the man has skills and opportunity which will enable him to provide a comfortable life for his family on his own. It implies an ability to provide security. To earn good money, to physically and emotionally sustain the stress of his work environment as best as he can.
- Such skills would be: high IQ, good memory, social influence (popularity,
status, social adjustment), work ethic, competitiveness, beauty (it actually does open doors and implies biological advantages beyond looking good), inventiveness, risk taking, practical skill (motor skill, handiness and the like), emotional and psychological resilience, etc...
- Such opportunity would be good background, breeding, support network (country organisation, local community, family, friends) giving him a head start in life in terms of health, support and motivation...
In short: A man's overall power and ability to exert it.
Many know that female desire to "get with a rich guy" is a very real desire and many women will readily deny this for fear of being branded as "gold diggers". But accusing the woman of being a gold digger simply for having this desire means to misunderstand it, or attempt to manipulate her partner selection trough shaming.
Gold diggers are not interested in the man as a partner, in love, emotional connection, family... Gold diggers want one thing and one thing only: the gold. They will fuck an old man in a hospital bed if it brings them money. And they don't care about anything else but the money. Anything but a rich man is seen as failure even if they do go for "less".
Normal women consider this only an attractive aspect of the man. His ability to provide is the superficial, basic requirement they will place on him, but it's not the end all, be all of this partnership, like it is for the gold digger.
For a normal woman, a man's ability to provide is seen like a woman's beauty is seen by a normal man. The desire to get with a rich man is equivalent to the desire to get with a female 10.
It's just an "ideal".
They will be initially drawn by these "provider traits" to the man, but an emotional connection will soon be established making these traits a bonus to the partnership, not its essence.
A woman may lose her beauty and a man may lose his skill to provide, but a partner who is not superficial will stick around and fight it out, or fall with you. The emotional safety such loyalty and love imply are not removed just because the woman, or the man was originally attracted by the superficial.There is a grey area where the love dies when the woman turns into a whale, cuts off sex and refuses to fix it, or if the man becomes a bum and refuses to get off the couch, provide emotional support, etc.
I am not saying love and attraction are not unaffected by different superficial factors. Love does need to be sustained and nurtured just like a living organism, but I am saying it is not directly conditioned by them.
Just like a plant, you must nurture love to grow and thrive, but failing to water it once, or twice, or even a while will not cause it to wilt. Consistently neglecting it for a long time without any care is what will kill the plant.
In the same manner, if love was directly conditioned by the superficial, the woman would leave the moment her man loses his money (like a gold digger), or the man would leave the moment his wife loses her looks.
So... What did men become for us?
- Smarter (I'm sure this is a controversial claim that should piss a lot of feminists of, but on average, there is no denying this. Men's brains developed to problem solve. They have higher average IQs and just a simple glance at work statistics, scientists, inventors, psychologists, artists and even a simple conversation with many people of both genders should clue a clever person in on this. I'm sorry ladies, but it's not the patriarchy that is "keeping us down". It's our mental ability and biologically conditioned interests. Men are smarter because we needed them to think fast and think well, while we were too busy with not dying during childbirth. They are decorated with pretty feathers because they needed those to get our attention, while we already had theirs.)
- Stronger (It's unbelievable one has to argue this at all, but for some people this is controversy. Men are stronger, faster, with better reflexes, better resistance, tolerance to pain and anything else you can think of when you consider physical ability. There isn't a single sport in the world that would allow a single category without gender segregation. Includes things like chess and poker. Though those two do refer to my previous point as well.)
- More aggressive, risk taking, emotionally resilient, pridefull, inventive... Just better at survival in any given environment. It was their job to fight and make sure we and our children survive, so today, they can do it all better than us. They fight to survive better than we do and they enjoy it more than we do. Their biology even rewards them for "manly" behaviours with a sense of fulfilment, because that's exactly what we (women) did for 6 million years. (We rarely experience same feelings.)
Guys, haven't you ever wondered why women pettily insist a guy has to earn as much, or more than them? Why marriages degrade and fall apart once women become providers?
Even though a non-feminist woman ready to admit to this is extremely rare, subconsciously they all know it. They know what they need and they know what they really expect from you...
- To be stronger than them in as many ways possible, to provide more than them. To be more skilful than them. If you fail to establish this perception in her eyes, she's more likely to lose respect, in extension her interest in you.
Thanks to modern feminism, job opportunities for women, affirmative action trying to bypass female natural limitations and modern technologies allowing women to leave the household and work, this task of appearing to be superior to a woman in order to capture her interest has become increasingly difficult. Women have been convinced they don't even need men. So much so, that some males don't even see how they can possibly change that anymore, so they don't feel motivated to try. Most have been convinced by feminism it's not even possible... We're equal after all.
- Any field dominated by women loses prestige thus losing male candidates.
- Any job that earns less money than a common woman's occupation is really seen as not worth fighting for.
- The purpose of providing for a woman and a child has become disrespected and casual for our society. Many jokes in popular comedies come at the expense od stupid fathers and husbands.
What did anyone expect young men of the next generation to do but say: Meh...