Are women biologically programmed to reward cruelty, evil and domination?

[gothicusmaximus]

I think you're confusing evil and sadism with mental health, which are only related in that they're qualities you lack. Self-love is rewarded, not 'evil', and self-loathing, not 'kindness', is punished, especially by the opposite sex.
Consider 'buy me a drink?'. The guy who says yes is technically 'kinder', but a pretty girl sees just another asshole bending over backwards in an attempt to exchange cash and flattery for sex-- and, to be fair, she's probably not too far off base. The guy who says no, conversely, communicates that he isn't afraid to risk the displeasure of a pretty girl, which in turn enhances his attractiveness. In this situation, the actual (very slight) difference in kindness isn't what determines the girl's preference. Actual evil-- like senseless murder-- is plainly met by our society with an even greater reproach than the obsequious, spineless supplication exhibited by what you call 'nice' guys.
I don't know why I even bothered writing that, you're clearly just a substantially more autistic version of every pathetic, sexless man-- "WELL IF SHE WANTS AN ASSHOLE LIKE THAT, WHO NEEDS HER".

[MacabreHellgrave]

cool story bro

Oh, and successful troll is successful

[MacabreHellgrave]

... In all seriousness, if you feel this bad, maybe you should kill yourself because surely, you do not wish to continue in a world that 'rewards cruelty and evil'.

I believe the pathologically depressed people should be allowed to end it because clearly, the drive for life isn't there and they're just taking up the space that someone else could be making a superior effort with. If there's no fight anymore, why bother playing the game of life?

[blindNsect]

har dee har ting pao

[MacabreHellgrave]

Originally Posted by blindNsect

har dee har ting pao

What in the blazes do you mean by this?

[KissMeDeadly]

Let me help you narrow all that down.

Women, from a purely instinctual and primal level, want to make babies with the biggest, strongest, male, because a larger, stronger, animal will be able to protect young better than a scrawny wimpy male.

I'm not trying to say that all women want huge masculine bikers, obviously this is not true in every case.

This is why I see a lot more big guy being married with kids, and a lot of little guys getting laid a lot, but with less marriages/children.

And so, what does this have to do with assholes? People tend to mistake douchebag over-aggressiveness with confidence, and in turn confidence with masculinity and 'tough-ness'.

[KontanKarite]

I don't think it's even that complicated. People are attracted to power and their idea of what is powerful. The one that closest embodies that idea for that person will attract them. A lot of attraction is that "spark" if you will.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by KissMeDeadly

Let me help you narrow all that down.

Women, from a purely instinctual and primal level, want to make babies with the biggest, strongest, male, because a larger, stronger, animal will be able to protect young better than a scrawny wimpy male.

I'm not trying to say that all women want huge masculine bikers, obviously this is not true in every case.

This is why I see a lot more big guy being married with kids, and a lot of little guys getting laid a lot, but with less marriages/children.

And so, what does this have to do with assholes? People tend to mistake douchebag over-aggressiveness with confidence, and in turn confidence with masculinity and 'tough-ness'.

Thats heteronormative, assuming all or even most women want babies, let alone consciously or unconsciously pick the strongest male because of some primal urge we just can't control. Women are less unified in what they find attractive than men are, and even then they seem to prefer lean men than huge body builders.

I don't even think its about power. Now, there are women who want the man to be the breadwinner and will look for that, but I would say most women AND men would rather someone who is healthy and independent, its not fun dating someone if you're always paying the bill, always trying to pluck up their fragile self esteem, or if they're not in shape to keep up with you.

[Solumina]

I can empathize, I'm having a bit of insomnia at the moment too, but at least I don't have to work until later in the day.

[Ben Lahnger]

Yeah, but even insomnia hardly explains the amount of trollery in this thread, and how much we all want to refute it when we should know better.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Solumina

I can empathize, I'm having a bit of insomnia at the moment too, but at least I don't have to work until later in the day.

We've replaced the Rant Thread with the Women Reward Ebil thread, lets see if Solumina notices

[Solumina]

That's weird, my post was in response to Saya's post in the rant thread, what the hell is it doing here?

[Ben Lahnger]

LMAO!!!! Saya, brilliant!

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by Saya

Thats heteronormative, assuming all or even most women want babies, let alone consciously or unconsciously pick the strongest male because of some primal urge we just can't control. Women are less unified in what they find attractive than men are, and even then they seem to prefer lean men than huge body builders.

I don't even think its about power. Now, there are women who want the man to be the breadwinner and will look for that, but I would say most women AND men would rather someone who is healthy and independent, its not fun dating someone if you're always paying the bill, always trying to pluck up their fragile self esteem, or if they're not in shape to keep up with you.

My usage on the word "power" didn't emphasize general ideas of it. Power isn't the right word possibly. But in a sense, I was saying that what a certain person finds attractive is what they may consider powerful.

I think the big thing is, a lot of people seem to think that a lot of the whole dating thing is a matter of convincing the other party to like you. I don't think it's correct to think that way.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by KissMeDeadly

Let me help you narrow all that down.

Women, from a purely instinctual and primal level, want to make babies with the biggest, strongest, male, because a larger, stronger, animal will be able to protect young better than a scrawny wimpy male.

I'm not trying to say that all women want huge masculine bikers, obviously this is not true in every case.

This is why I see a lot more big guy being married with kids, and a lot of little guys getting laid a lot, but with less marriages/children.

And so, what does this have to do with assholes? People tend to mistake douchebag over-aggressiveness with confidence, and in turn confidence with masculinity and 'tough-ness'.

Hahahahahaha.

[ART]

This conversation just turned interesting.

But, alas, I smell a cultural barrier. What exactly is this dating thing over at your side of the pond?
You see, I doubt we do it the same way.

[ape descendant]

Er, you know, I think this may be a question of nature vs nurture. There's a certain amount of what we think of as attractive, that is learned.

I don't see how being attracted to douche-bags improves the fitness of a complexly social species. Things like cooperation are far more advantageous to human beings than aggression and conflict.

Anyway, I think your aggressive-male-centered view of human evolution may be off a bit, considering that our closest living relatives as a species are matriarchal, and substitute sex for aggression. Considering that we share common ancestry with them more recently than the other great apes, suggests that it would probably be closer to reality to take a look at the behavior of the Bonobo chimps to better understand ourselves as opposed to say, gorillas or larger chimps.

[ape descendant]

To correct myself. We do not share a more recent common ancestor with Bonobo's, than other great apes. What we do share is 98% of our DNA.. sorry for the cock up.

[creature6]

And the story never end!

[Solumina]

[quote=ape descendant;615840]What we do share is 98% of our DNA./QUOTE]
While 98% sound really impressive it doesn't mean all that much, after all we share about 94% of our DNA with a banana.

[ape descendant]

[quote=Solumina;615859]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

What we do share is 98% of our DNA./QUOTE]
While 98% sound really impressive it doesn't mean all that much, after all we share about 94% of our DNA with a banana.

We share 50% of our DNA with Bananas, 30% with daffodils, all one big happy family.

[Solumina]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

We share 50% of our DNA with Bananas, 30% with daffodils, all one big happy family.

Actually it really depends on how you define your terms and seems to only be true if you are only looking at the coding sequences which only accounts for 10% of the genome. DNA is far too complicated to actually do a specific comparison from species to species of the entire genome, especially since we aren't genetically homogeneous ourselves and most of statements about how humans share whatever amount of DNA with whatever species are pretty much meaningless.

Woo I did retain something from Bio 107.

[Saya]

Except when it comes to apes and especially chimps, they definitely are our closest living relative and give us ideas as to what our mutual ancestors were like. And there's enough genetic similarities to be impressed by, there's no plans to actually do this but when they mapped the mammoth genome there was talk about how we can do the same to the neanderthal, the last other hominid besides ourselves, and it might be an option if we were to clone a neanderthal to use a chimp as a surrogate mother instead of a human.

[Ben Lahnger]

And some men share 100% of their DNA with hammers ...

.

.

.

.

.

.

... because they're TOOLS! Ha ha ha!

[KontanKarite]

Aahhh, that's a good one.