Other interesting thing about hunter gathers is due to the lower caloric foods the females usually don't complete puberty till approximately 17 , which leads to an increased female height and body size as the hormones signalling from mensuration causes long bones to stop growing and the growth plates to fuse. This also pushes the typical age of first reproduction to 19 to 22. I
'tis kind of amusing to me that the stress of modern post industrial society is returning females to a previous reproductive strategy with delayed childrearing and serial monogamy.
That simping is relativity new in human populations and the genetic markers for it don't appear until humans started staying in one place.
The selection for it is modern, in hunter gather societies that never had agriculture the females tend to have closer levels of interpersonal physical aggression and even less sexual dimorphism. For example Aboriginal females 3d spatial ability stays on par with males until like 15 and ultimately have less variance between the sexes in it as adults, where as other races tend to show females lagging in CNS development by like 5 or 6 years old. Teenage female abbos have similar athletic ability as males even raised in western civilization.
Because human parental investment is different than birds. Women can't survive without men in the wild after giving birth and need like 7 years of investment to successfully raise an offspring who might kill her so both sexes have a lot of skin in the game. the male needs to be very capable of surviving and the female needs to be healthy enough to survive childbirth and invest years into nursing and raising a child or the males effort goes to waste so both sexes have to have displays for the other sex. Polygamy in humans only appeared about 20,000 years ago according to genetics on the x and y chromosomes. Until agriculture shot gunning your sperm into a lot of low to mid quality women wasn't viable.
Male birds are colourful to show health. Female humans are colourful...hair, blush in cheeks, to show they still have youth and they are at the fertile point of cycles, since unlike most animals, female humans outlive fertility by a lot, and even during the fertile years, aren't fertile all the time. What's interesting is that males usually are the ones who bring resources to the female, even if the female insect is larger...but in lions where the male is larger, the females bring food to the male.
wrong. females have to be bigger to have the resources for producing eggs, and they're usually the ones guarding the nest. think for 5 seconds next time before you post
This is due to the historic patriarchic standard of masculine being 'better' and feminine being 'worse' rather than the two being considered neutrally and equally.
This is why any conversation about sexual dimorphism in animals always collapses into mammalian humanoid men coping about their status in the animal kingdom, considering that for most animals aside from mammals, the males are either flamboyant and colourful or smaller than the females.
Feminists and chauvenists read it unfairly. It's not that is better so much as it's that one is suited to leading and acting where the other is suited to following and inspiring. One supports, the other builds.
The standard is enforced metaphysically, not just patriarchally. It's manifest in history.
It's manifest genetically, and in statistics. The way we think. The way our religions developed.
>unfairly. It's not that is
That one is*
And it also becomes easier to see when viewing groups within races and castes instead of across them.
A gorilla female vs a human male isnt a fair representaion of the balance.
>It's not that is better so much as it's that one is suited to leading and acting where the other is suited to following and inspiring.
Source: trust me bro
Well it's known to medicine and psychology that males and females of our species are built physiologically and psychologically differently. We're mostly the same but men are more disagreeable, prone to extremes.
If you're not sure which order is "metaphysically" right just take a quick look across animal societies and note the trends. What do dominant female animals look and act like, where do they live. Etc.
Our historical balance is the only one we know of that leads to Egypt and Greece and China and India and that sort of thing.
Look up the difference between image thinking and rational thinking.
Look at the balance of sexual and mental maturity and the implications there.
Read the philosophy and the history.
Dont act like this thread and your 29-some-odd year old friends are the first ones to discuss this. Its very small minded to think this can all be chalked up to sophomoric banter. What chances are there really that you're more secure and mature than millions of dead elders.
2 months ago
Anonymous
>29-some-odd
20-some-odd
2 months ago
Anonymous
>males and females of our species are built physiologically and psychologically differently.
true, obviously men and women are broadly different, but people are individuals. the question is, are you saying we should let things play out based on individual preference, or we should enforce historical gender norms by social pressure, gatekeeping and force?
‘masculine’ generally is better. Feminine has its place obviously, but it’s at the home and helping to rear the next generation. Society on the other hand must be led by men. Patriarchy is so common because it’s so successful.
Did you know that in old age, men's testosterone decreases and women's estrogen decreases - and so matriarchy tends to grant leadership to older women?
Women are also historically seen as more spiritually connected, intuitive beings, even when not in leadership positions.
Man is in a sense the conscious ruler of the material world, woman the unconscious.
Its like anime rules. The smaller weaker thing has all the hidden power. Baby gohan needs daddy goku but the hidden ability there is stronger.
Doesnt mean goku isnt the leader though.
I think dragonball z could be a great intro to metaphysics for any sour feminist.
>‘masculine’ generally is better. Feminine has its place
I agree with the rest of what you said, but I don't know why one has to be considered better than the other, and "has its place" undermines it like they're just filling some niche. You're both important, men and women are a yin and yang. Believing so doesn't mean you want twerking female presidents.
Not really, I'd say mammals are the exception while insects, reptiles, and birds all in many cases follow the pretty male pattern to a greater degree so it's actually we who are backwards.
Birds are ZW. Actually ZW is the basal state of amniotes. Is mammals who have it mutated into XY
The difference in the former is that the female produces different gametes (Z and W eggs as opossed to X eggs) while the male produces the same fixated gamete (always Z i think)
Other interesting thing about hunter gathers is due to the lower caloric foods the females usually don't complete puberty till approximately 17 , which leads to an increased female height and body size as the hormones signalling from mensuration causes long bones to stop growing and the growth plates to fuse. This also pushes the typical age of first reproduction to 19 to 22. I
'tis kind of amusing to me that the stress of modern post industrial society is returning females to a previous reproductive strategy with delayed childrearing and serial monogamy.
Not all HG females were abbos. Gravettian women were 5 foot 3 with huge breasts, Gravettian men were 5 foot 10
That simping is relativity new in human populations and the genetic markers for it don't appear until humans started staying in one place.
The selection for it is modern, in hunter gather societies that never had agriculture the females tend to have closer levels of interpersonal physical aggression and even less sexual dimorphism. For example Aboriginal females 3d spatial ability stays on par with males until like 15 and ultimately have less variance between the sexes in it as adults, where as other races tend to show females lagging in CNS development by like 5 or 6 years old. Teenage female abbos have similar athletic ability as males even raised in western civilization.
Because human parental investment is different than birds. Women can't survive without men in the wild after giving birth and need like 7 years of investment to successfully raise an offspring who might kill her so both sexes have a lot of skin in the game. the male needs to be very capable of surviving and the female needs to be healthy enough to survive childbirth and invest years into nursing and raising a child or the males effort goes to waste so both sexes have to have displays for the other sex. Polygamy in humans only appeared about 20,000 years ago according to genetics on the x and y chromosomes. Until agriculture shot gunning your sperm into a lot of low to mid quality women wasn't viable.
Wtf are you talking about? They're exactly like humans, men need to be top 5% in looks to get laid due to hoeflation while women just need to be there
>Its like they are in opposito universe.
not really. the male still has to win over the female's right to mate with her.
It's called peawienering for a reason
I hate humans who do this
you mean homosexuals
Male birds are colourful to show health. Female humans are colourful...hair, blush in cheeks, to show they still have youth and they are at the fertile point of cycles, since unlike most animals, female humans outlive fertility by a lot, and even during the fertile years, aren't fertile all the time. What's interesting is that males usually are the ones who bring resources to the female, even if the female insect is larger...but in lions where the male is larger, the females bring food to the male.
Not that long ago, were were no different
Guy looks like his allergies are acting up
Yeah but the males are always bigger and aggressive.
In birds? Males are often smaller and less aggressive.
wrong. females have to be bigger to have the resources for producing eggs, and they're usually the ones guarding the nest. think for 5 seconds next time before you post
>Tomboyish female bird
>Flamboyant male bird
I like this trope
The birds do too, apparently.
You've never seen a woman unshaved and without makeup. There's a reason girls need all of that, while men don't.
Until recently males dressed very colorfully and showy. Men wearing nothing but black, brown and grey is something that started in XIX century.
This. Women basically copy whatever the men are doing.
This is due to the historic patriarchic standard of masculine being 'better' and feminine being 'worse' rather than the two being considered neutrally and equally.
This is why any conversation about sexual dimorphism in animals always collapses into mammalian humanoid men coping about their status in the animal kingdom, considering that for most animals aside from mammals, the males are either flamboyant and colourful or smaller than the females.
Feminists and chauvenists read it unfairly. It's not that is better so much as it's that one is suited to leading and acting where the other is suited to following and inspiring. One supports, the other builds.
The standard is enforced metaphysically, not just patriarchally. It's manifest in history.
It's manifest genetically, and in statistics. The way we think. The way our religions developed.
Here's one such moron now.
Grow up
>unfairly. It's not that is
That one is*
And it also becomes easier to see when viewing groups within races and castes instead of across them.
A gorilla female vs a human male isnt a fair representaion of the balance.
>It's not that is better so much as it's that one is suited to leading and acting where the other is suited to following and inspiring.
Source: trust me bro
Well it's known to medicine and psychology that males and females of our species are built physiologically and psychologically differently. We're mostly the same but men are more disagreeable, prone to extremes.
If you're not sure which order is "metaphysically" right just take a quick look across animal societies and note the trends. What do dominant female animals look and act like, where do they live. Etc.
Our historical balance is the only one we know of that leads to Egypt and Greece and China and India and that sort of thing.
Look up the difference between image thinking and rational thinking.
Look at the balance of sexual and mental maturity and the implications there.
Read the philosophy and the history.
Dont act like this thread and your 29-some-odd year old friends are the first ones to discuss this. Its very small minded to think this can all be chalked up to sophomoric banter. What chances are there really that you're more secure and mature than millions of dead elders.
>29-some-odd
20-some-odd
>males and females of our species are built physiologically and psychologically differently.
true, obviously men and women are broadly different, but people are individuals. the question is, are you saying we should let things play out based on individual preference, or we should enforce historical gender norms by social pressure, gatekeeping and force?
‘masculine’ generally is better. Feminine has its place obviously, but it’s at the home and helping to rear the next generation. Society on the other hand must be led by men. Patriarchy is so common because it’s so successful.
youre blinded by your own stupidity and human point of view
why do trannies think themselves so much better than us lowly, lowly normal people?
I'm not even a troony, I'm biologically female. I don't comply to female brain standards
Let birds judge flight and humans judge thought
> human point of view
You have to be at least 18 to post here bro
Did you know that in old age, men's testosterone decreases and women's estrogen decreases - and so matriarchy tends to grant leadership to older women?
Women are also historically seen as more spiritually connected, intuitive beings, even when not in leadership positions.
Man is in a sense the conscious ruler of the material world, woman the unconscious.
Its like anime rules. The smaller weaker thing has all the hidden power. Baby gohan needs daddy goku but the hidden ability there is stronger.
Doesnt mean goku isnt the leader though.
I think dragonball z could be a great intro to metaphysics for any sour feminist.
>‘masculine’ generally is better. Feminine has its place
I agree with the rest of what you said, but I don't know why one has to be considered better than the other, and "has its place" undermines it like they're just filling some niche. You're both important, men and women are a yin and yang. Believing so doesn't mean you want twerking female presidents.
Eating your babies is a successful survival strategy, that doesn't mean we need it anymore.
Not really, I'd say mammals are the exception while insects, reptiles, and birds all in many cases follow the pretty male pattern to a greater degree so it's actually we who are backwards.
Reptiles still have sexual dysmorphia similar to us. Birds are either the male is smaller or they're both the same size.
Isn't it because the chromosomes are reversed in birds? XX is male and XY is female.
>source: it was revealed to me in a dream
Birds are ZW. Actually ZW is the basal state of amniotes. Is mammals who have it mutated into XY
The difference in the former is that the female produces different gametes (Z and W eggs as opossed to X eggs) while the male produces the same fixated gamete (always Z i think)
but how does that work with crocodiles where temp determines sex
>source: it was revealed to me in a dream
one of the greatest mysteries of our time
interesting how both of those characters are part bird too
?
Only metroid is part alien bird afaik (adopted by the chozo race of hyperintelligent advanced spiritual vulture beings)
Link is a hylian troony
how is link part bird
just because totk link has tulin's semen in his butthole doesn't mean the bird dna is part of him