Bateman Principle:
"Typically it is the
females who have a relatively larger investment in producing each offspring. Bateman attributed the origin of the unequal investment to the differences in the production of gametes: sperm are cheaper than eggs. A single
male can easily fertilize all of a female's eggs; she will not produce more offspring by mating with more than one male. A male is capable of fathering more offspring if he mates with several females. By and large, a male's potential reproductive success is limited by the number of females he mates with, whereas a female's potential reproductive success is limited by how many eggs she can produce. According to Bateman's principle, this results in
sexual selection, in which males compete with each other, and females become choosy in which males to mate with. Thus, as a result of being
anisogamous, males are fundamentally promiscuous, and females are fundamentally selective."
Thus, males typically have lower standards while females have high standards. It's all biological. A woman will look for good genes and also someone who can support and protect her. Meanwhile a male can easily have many children and walk away. Thus, the female has to increase standards even further. Unattractive males will become desperate for women, lowering their standards further. Meanwhile rare Chads can fit into the Bateman's principle: nut and leave.
My theory: Female is attracted to Chad, but Chad has many options. He can have sex with her and then leave. It will satisfy her arousal urges. So she settles for a male who is lower on the attractiveness scale, but can financially support her. He is desperate for her, so he blindsides anything suspicious. Now we have a cuckoo situation. The man is raising Chad's kids, maybe he had some with her as well, so it might be a mixed bunch. The female however will eventually be tired of giving sex to the low attractive male and the facade will slip. So the male will go and seek other females for comfort. Both cheated.
Also it depends on timeframe in history. Women have pushed the feminist movement, and might be less likely to be r***d or put in financially weak situations or other circumstances that would cause them to settle. Now, their standards will increase further. I think
@Wilk made a thread on this.
Now, is it a good thing or a bad thing? It is not simply black and white, you cannot assign morality to this. Yes, there will probably be poor mental health and many lonely men. But the overall genetic quality of the world will hopefully increase due to this massive sexual selection pressure. Because humans have gotten weaker. Hopefully we can improve now. Also I hope for genetic engineering FAST.
Obviously, there are exceptions. Some people's brain chemistry is wired differently so they might genuinely be able to hold down a good relationship regardless of attractiveness. But I am talked about what we generally see in society and also nature. Humans are still animals, believe it or not.
There are also other biological theories on attractiveness, I made an old thread on it:
https://forum.looksmaxxing.com/threads/social-mating-patterns-and-influences.10942/
Wilk and some other threads here have interesting information as well.
Both men and women care about children btw. Men care that they
have children that will succeed, so they will prefer a caring woman. Females care about having kids with someone with superior traits and then raising them due to maternal instinct.
I read something about fetuses and babies. Yeah they're not the same, a fetus is the unborn, still going through prenatal development version of a baby. Don't understand your point though. They have different definitions so obviously not the same. Is this an argument for abortion?
ur not real
