>mfw I realized that women resent fucking betas as much as

I don't understand what realization you have come to?

Women don't like betas? Women wants to fuck Chad? Doesn't really sound like anything that isn't said here atleast every day.

Btw beta rape culture also explains why so many people are ugly weak and stupid, this monstrous beta society is basically forcing poor innocent qts who want to be filled only with Chad semen to accept the inferior monster beta spawn.

If you want to know if you're beta just ask yourself if women are always smiling at you staring at you rubbing against you or making lewd proposals to you,

If they're not do all the poor women and girls of the world a favor and keep your cock in your pants.

>>34162447
I guess i never realized how bad betas were

>>34162664
Why are they bad just because women don't like them?

Women are completely shallow creatures. They judge you based only on your physical characteristics and your social statues.

File: 1484380472395.gif (844KB, 800x786px) Image search: [Google]

844KB, 800x786px

>>34162450
Kek how about no?

>>34162450
Then ugly women shouldn't be allowed to breed either. But they do.

>>34162698
>Women are completely shallow creatures. They judge you based only on your physical characteristics and your social statues.

And what is wrong with that?

>>34162875
It means that their judgement is completely superficial.

You putting importance on it, shows that you too are a superficial person.

Women can like what they like, but please be less of a cuckold and try to read behind it some noble motivation.

>>34162374
>Monogamy is basically socially accepted rape

>>34162875
But those aren't shallow things at all.

Appearance reflects health good breeding and discipline

Status reflects the above and manly character

>>34162698
No betas are bad because they want to force themselves on women who would rather fuck Chad and improve humanity thereby polluting the gene pool

File: 16337335.jpg (8KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 225x225px

>>34162968
>>34162997

I don't get you roastie apologists.

The entire logical fallacy here is that Chad's genes are somehow superior. Except for like the bottom 10% of people, the actually disabled and impaired due to genetics, genes don't work on a basis of superior or inferior in the long run. One of the worst possible things you could do for the species, is to have your harem situation, where only the top Chad's reproduce with all women.

Women might hate it, but everyone reproducing fairly, is the best option for the good of the species. That's why you have to have things like monogamy, because if they had their way, indeed women would just cluster in harems to the top few guys, and ruin humanity in the long run.

>>34163063
The thing is that Chad genes are not even the top quality genes.

Chads have a mixture of feminine and masculine traits. They are basically pretty boys, and that's what women like. Women are turned off and intimidated by guys who are all masculine.

Women are retards and they want mediocre Chad genes instead of strong manly genes.

>>34163063
>muh equality maymay

Next thing you'll tell me Jamal and Shaneeqa would be astrophysicists if it wasn't for evil whitey creating inequality

>>34163063
>using survival of humanity as an excuse to get women to sleep with you

>>34163144
Well if Chad's genes help him reproduce more then they're not necessarily inferior. The problem is that just because he has the right genes to give him a desireable appearance, doesn't mean he has good genes across the board, which is what matters.

>>34163163
>equality

Not sure what you're on about there, I don't agree with that at all. Just because genes are not superior/inferior doesn't mean they're equal otherwise.

The valuable thing with genes is not superior/inferior or equality, but diversity. The more variated genes in the species, the better. Of course people aren't equal, and that can be because of their genes. But it's more important to have a wide variety of genes in the species, than to only have the best genes.

>>34163199
>Trying to simplify the issue that much

I don't care if a woman sleeps with me individually or not. The point is that everyone should be able to pass on their genes.

>>34163144
>implying women haven't honed a ruthless instinct for separating the genetic wheat from the chaff

Say what you will about women but they are very very good at this.

Betas will often lie and say stupid shit like oh women actually choose the wrong guys if it wasn't for monogamy they'd all just ride nigger cock but it's absolutely not true.

Women everywhere will go mad for the real top class alpha Chad: smart, strong, healthy, good looking white man.

Betas will deny this and push their "women love savage mudpeople and scum" propaganda to defend the indefensible. But everyone posting here knows well that the average Chad can go to Africa, Asia anywhere in the world and just have women begging for it, sitting in his lap feeling his muscles giggling asking if he had a girlfriend and generally being total sluts around him because he has the right stuff and millions of years of evolution are guiding women to impale their sopping wet holes on his meatstick

>>34163219
But in species where monogamy isn't practiced less genes make it into every generation and it seems to work out OK

Are you sure that the genes that would be weeded out if the beta tyranny was ended aren't the ones that should die out anyway?

>>34163281
Women are not attracted to intelligence. You want to apparently breed a species of tall, muscular chads and tyrones who spend their entire life with their jersey shore antics.

I would have to ask one question. Why?

>>34163281
That's very true but the point is that if only the top Chads who have everything going for them, strong, smart, attractive, healthy, sociable, etc... are the only ones who reproduce, say with all the women like the supposed harem situation, then you severely impair the diversity of genes in the population.

This can work in other species but humans are one of the (admittedly unfortunate) species where it doesn't work.

>>34163322
>Women are not attracted to intelligence

Sure they are as long as it is actually useful. Chicks dig a cute intellectual or dreamy professor.

This idea that women don't like smart guys is an autist meme

>>34163249
Most people would prefer to live an enjoyable life (choosing their own partner) over having marginally better genetics.

>>34163281
But the fact is that women don't like guys who are too masculine. They like Chads who are a balance of feminine and masculine.

If you show a woman a nice looking fashionable pretty boy and a big, hulking, strongman with a heavy brow ridge and huge muscles, women will go for the pretty boy every time.

If you are brute mode you are not going to attract women. You can beat Chads in a fight but you can't beat them at finding a mate.

>>34163355
>Sure they are as long as it is actually useful

No. Women are attracted to social status. Not intelligence.

>Chicks dig a cute intellectual or dreamy professor.

They 'dig' 'cute and dreamy' men in general.

>>34162698
Yeah, and those things are important because they are fundamentally what matters

>>34163321
The important thing is that other species can get away with it, and humans cannot.

It's unfortunate, but humans have very, very low genetic diversity by comparison to most other animals. This is because in our distant past, we suffered a population bottleneck event which should have driven us extinct (and likely would have made extinct most other animals) but we're tenacious bastards who held on and survived. It was so bad that the speculation is, there were maybe only like 2000 humans alive in the entire world.

So we survived, good for us as adaptive beings! But the problem is that forever after, we are all of us still only descended from those few 2000 people, and it has sort of cursed us to have a very, very narrow gene pool by comparison. That's why incest and inbreeding is such a danger for humans and badly fucks us up, meanwhile other animals can inbreed regularly and be just fine with it. They have the genetic diversity while we don't.

So that's how you can have species like lions, where usually it's just one male lion who breeds with all the female lions, and they have and always will be that way and they don't suffer for it. For us humans though, at the cost of not going extinct, we ended up being unable to do the lion thing, and needing most everyone to pass on genes.

>Of course it's obvious that this is a long term species problem, so it's not like an individual woman is evil for wanting Chad. But it's something we should keep in mind as a species, when thinking about genetics.

>>34163355
Wrong. Chad can have sex whenever he wants, so he has no incentive to become interested in intellectual pursuits. All of the great scientists and artists in history, the ones who moved humanity further, were ugly betas. A world of Chads would quickly degenerate into caveman-tier primitivism.

>>34163465
They are what matters to women. They are what women think are important.

>>34163357
Of course but the idea is that most people also get to pass on their genes at least.

If you go to the very extreme, then you'd end up with a situation where women cluster in harems and only the top percent of guys reproduce. Meanwhile the vast swathe of men never do.

There's nothing wrong with people choosing who they want to be with, and who they are attracted to. But there is something wrong, if a large portion of the population never gets to reproduce.

>>34163478
Sorry dork you don't get to claim the world's great men for your team that easily, look at Tesla id have gone gay for that handsome guy

>>34163537
Tesla is a meme. A vast majority of great scientists and artists weren't Chad.

>>34163355
It's not that women don't value intelligence. It's that most if not all value attractiveness much higher.

An attractive, smart guy is going to win always, but that's only a rare few guys. Otherwise, if you have only an attractive dumb guy or an ugly smart guy, the handsome stupid guy will win.

>>34163553
A lot of them weren't sexually deficient they just channeled their energy and vitality in another direction

They weren't like modern day losers whacking it to anime or whatever

>>34163580
Women do not value intelligence at all. They value social statues. They would prefer a handsome doctor, not because he is smart, but because there is a lot of status to being a doctor.

>>34163583
They channeled their vitality in art and science because they weren't Chad.
>>34163611
A bigger problem is that Chad is usually a conformist who will believe anything the media tells him. His kids will be even more normie, etc, until we have an entire race of subservient unquestioning wagecucks.

>>34163611
I think that's more a modern problem.

If you back to ancient times, basic intelligence mattered much more because it had a much more direct impact on living. Today, a dumb person and a smart person can still generally have comparable lives.

In ancient times though, the smart guy will prepare for the winter while the dumb guy won't. In times past, intelligence was a matter of life or death so it was attractive. Nowadays, there's the net of society to catch you if you're stupid.

File: image.jpg (48KB, 432x413px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 432x413px

>robots talk about "chads" like they are some kind of god and that all women only want chad again
Think you guys would get tired of this shit over and over.

>>34163553
>A vast majority of great scientists and artists weren't Chad.

Great artists tend to be way better looking than average.

Think about the stereotype that British people are ugly. Generally speaking if you go around the UK you will find this is mostly true.

But look at all the musicians from the UK. You will find that many of them are really good looking.

>Damon Albarn
>David Bowie
>George Michael
>Syd Barrett
>David Gilmoure
>Freddie Mercury
>Skream
>Ian Curtis

>>34163740
because you need stage appeal to be a selling musician. an ugly musician has a weaker brand.

>>34163740
because music is just selling sex. Ever wonder why the most popular musicians are all young? Because it isn't the music that's selling. It's the image.

>>34163034
>I'm ugly and have nothing going for me but I'll REEE if you don't find me attractive/fuck me

LITERALLY TUMBLR WHALE LOGIC

>>34163740
I'm talking about great art, not fucking pop music.

>>34163763
A lot of electronic music producers don't really need stage appeal, but they still tend to be better looking than average anyway.

It's because of good genes. Smart/artistically talented people have better genes than ugly people.

>>34163840
I don't really care if you don't find me attractive. It's that you try to make it out like some just system and not a matter of complete circumstance of birth and upbringing.

Women are like animals, stop defending them.

>>34163865
>electronic music producers
>talented

>>34163669
All else equal, it's better to be with a smart person than a dumb person though.

Intelligence matters, but looks do too. That's why you can have a doctor making 200k per year who isn't very attractive, but you can also have an attractive camwhore on youtube making pretty much the same amount.

I'd argue that one is more beneficial to society than the other, but in terms of economic value, they are treated the same.

>>34162374
Damn who the Fuck is that in the pic?
He has the "dicklet" gaze

Ugly shit desu not what I wanted to see

>>34163865
I think that assertion is founded on shaky ground to say the least. Obviously there can be correlations, but you would be better of not judging a book by its cover if you were looking for intelligence.

>>34163883
Oh, I see now. You're a retard. Carry on then.

>>34163865
Is this what its like to be bluepilled? Can we bottle this for people who want to be reconnected to the matrix?

File: 1484494941376.jpg (245KB, 600x535px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 600x535px

>>34162374
You remind of Rodger Elliott .

>>34163865
he looks just give them the in they need to start making money.

>>34163879
>He thinks he's not an animal
Das cute, mane.

>>34163914
t. /mu/ immigrant

When I say "great art", I'm not talking about dance beats, I'm talking about classical music and literature.

>>34163914
He is not retarded. For someone who speaks a big game about superior genes you display a complete lack of 'social intelligence' and instead come off as an obnoxious shit-talker.

>>34163941
>I have never listened to ambient or dub techno

Ok anon

>>34163940
I think you are being willfully obtuse now. Like an animal means without what makes humans distinct from other animals.

>>34163965
>ambient and dub techno producers are on the same level as Mozart or Wagner
Dance music is mostly generic assembly line bullshit. Can you name any Chad poets, or scientists?

>>34163935
Nah Elliot hated women and thought they didn't deserve to weed out bad genes

I'm the opposite I think women if anything should have more choice. If you're beta you should absolutely be a cuck and hire an alpha to breed your woman you know it's right

File: 1484412893698.jpg (119KB, 811x739px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 811x739px

>>34163926
This is literally the opposite of bluepilled you simpleton. This is a red pill, and one that can be pretty tough to swallow for you apparently.

This is a rejection of the just world fallacy that normies shove down your throat, which you have clearly been brainwashed by.

You seem to think if you're ugly, then you must be smart or have some special talent to make up for it. Or if someone is very attractive, then they must be really dumb to balance it out.

But that is not how the world works. We are not equal. Some are genetically superior to others.

You should read the book called "The naked ape".

If you don't assign wives to beta males, you can say goodbye to group think and cooperation.

There's a reason white people evolved beyond the early tribal stage.

>>34164040
>This is a rejection of the just world fallacy that normies shove down your throat

>handsome people are smart because you know they are handsome so of course they would be smart

yes ugly people deserve to be ugly. they are ugly on the inside too. what a great world and what a rejection of the just world fallacy.

>>34163763
>>34163834
>ignoring the innovation of great artists like Syd Barrett, Ian Curtis, and Skream

And the reason great musicians tend to be young is because you reach your creative peak in your 20s. After that you start to become less innovative. You can look at all kinds of artists to confirm this.

File: Einstein2.jpg (125KB, 750x1199px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 750x1199px

>>34164040
OMG you're right. How blind I was.

Thank you so much for making me see the light about our inferior genes.

>>34164134
There is no innovation in modern music. It's monkey music. Made by monkeys, for monkeys.

All modern music goes basically like this:

swoob doobie dooba bing bong bang shaka shaka wakka wakka dang dang OOOOOOOOOOHHH AAAAHHHHHHH YEEEPOP BOOOY dingading dong

>>34164109
>yes ugly people deserve to be ugly. they are ugly on the inside too. what a great world

Who said they deserve it? It's not their fault they are genetic trash. It's their parents' fault.

That's why I hate it when normies bully ugly people. They didn't ask for this.

>>34164164
Not an argument and a 0/10 post.

>>34164167
>they are genetic trash
>they didn't ask for this

I guess you don't include yourself in that group. Just another one of these delusional failed normalfags who come here to feel better about themselves.

>>34164134
Ok I'll go look at those artists. Thanks for convincing me.

>>34164198
Monkey musician: wab dabba dobba nap map mooba yingo jango ssssheeweettt *guitar riff* AAAAAH *bongo drumming intensifying* AAAAAAAHH YEOOOHHPER oooGAAA MOOOGGG AWWWEE HEEEERRRROOAAAA SWWOOOPP

You: I really love this guys unique 'sound' he got that 'x-factor'.

>>34163993
>Can you name any Chad poets, or scientists?

I don't know about Chad poets but Neil Degrasse Tyson is a famous Chad scientist, and Ernest Hemingway was a great Chad writer.

>>34162968
>Appearance reflects health good breeding and discipline
>health good breeding
What?
Also judging people by appearances is literally and essentially shallow.

>Status reflects the above and manly character
Social status doesn't reflect manliness. Some ugly rich beta could wife hotter chicks than the chaddiest of chads could.

>>34164335
Freeman Dyson too. Total fucking chad.

>>34163993
>Dance music is mostly generic assembly line bullshit

Listen to Gas - Konigsforst you idiot

>>34163940
We men are above animals and are more rational and less emotional than women.

Also the reason Virginia Woolf was a great writer is because she was hot. Same for George Eliot.

File: 1478663275242.png (7KB, 339x348px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 339x348px

>>34164418
>women
>great writers

Come on now

>>34164399
That's some primo human arrogance you got there, friendo.

>>34163355
they only care if that intelligence translates to WEALTH via high paying job, raw intelligence is nothing to them

>>34162450
>always smiling at you staring at you rubbing against you or making lewd proposals to you,
women do this to me, but I am a beta loser

>>34164459
Ok, Thomas Hardy then and Charles Dickens. Also heartthrob chads.

>>34162450
That's what money did to humanity, anon.

Fat, ugly, short men were able to buy women to procreate even though normally they'd never have a chance. Thank the jews for this mess.

>>34164679

The women willingly slept with them, idiot. As materialistic as they are, the money was worth it for them. And the rich guys knew it.

What difference does it make how you score some good pussy? A smart man reproduces his intelligent genes by earning a woman. A good looking man gets gifted the chance to reproduce his beautiful genes at will due to his good looks.

In the end, the woman is getting something out of it, whether it's money or an orgasm, but women can't love, they can't even love Chad either, if Chad loses his leg or gets third degree burns all over his face and head, bye bye loser, gonna get me a new Chad.

>>34164895
No they didn't.

Women would prefer polygamous marriage. Monogamy forces women to pair up with a man supposedly "in her league" even though in a dating free market she could likely gain a place in a more attractive and successful man's harem even if she couldn't be wife#1

Basically monogamy cuts the wings of alpha men, attempting to keep some women at least out or Chad's clutches when really he deserves as many women as he can keep.

It's also sad for women who are basically forced by the beta male conspiracy to sexually service unattractive men

>>34165010
Who cares what women wants? Only 2 types of people do:

women
faggots

>>34165010
>ugly guys can go fuck themselves lmao

It's not an ugly guy's fault that he is ugly. He didn't ask for this and he doesn't deserve to be shat on. Society is unfairly cruel to ugly men.

>>34162374
pretty standard redpill bud, but good for you for finally understanding this.

To women, betas are icky.

>>34165010

Women would not prefer any kind of marriage, they would just like to get fucked by Chads and have those multiple 6'4 rich never aging Chads fuck and take care of them for life.

That's unrealistic though. And women, live to be #1, they're competitive as fuck with one another. Especially today's women, who each individually think of themselves as princesses/models (whether they be it or not) will not put up with being Chads 7th wife who gets touched once in a blue moon. She'd rather get a little beta to follow her and kiss her ass (though she'd still fuck Chad given the chance)

Monogamy has never cut the wings of Alpha men, not once, women have cheated all through the ages, and good looks do not mean Alpha in any way shape or form. Donald Trump is infinitely more Alpha than any jock in your highschool for example.

There's no conspiracy idiot. Women are materialistic and like money. No one forces these bitches to only suck one ugly dick, they can go get fucked by Chads all they want as long as they're still young and attractive to Chads.

But most women realize that they'll age and they'll rather keep their cunt for one ugly dick as long as they can live a rich existence. They chose the money, over the multiple cocks.

And thank god women are materialistic, not for the sake of nerds getting laid, but for the sake of humanity. Imagine if women only kept going for good looking brutes? We'd take a billion years to get to the stars. Intelligent people need to reproduce and they found a way.

>>34163063
>but everyone reproducing fairly, is the best option for the good of the species
>muh group selection

Dis-proven and debunked theory. Genes only care about themselves.

>>34165090
Then off yourself legitimately nothing is stopping you. Be like that penguin that just walks off into the mountains. Your parents were the mistake you were just the consequence.

>>34165446
Not him but whats stopping you from killing yourself? No real Chad would ever be on /r9k/ and we all know it.

>>34165477
Because I'm not bitching about it. And I'm attractive enough that I've had women attracted to me before.

>>34165446
There are all kinds of things that could go wrong. You could mess it up and it would be painful.

After the way ugly people are treated, society owes them easy and painless suicide assistance. They didn't ask to exist and the burden is on society to help them.

>>34163249

>should

Why? Because you say so?

>>34162374
But i am mad at society because males are diposale and females get to exploit men. Women treat men like shit after we build civilization for them and they even reach in to my wallet to pay for her child with taxes after she becomes a single mother.

File: billgates1_wideweb__470x3470[1].jpg (42KB, 470x347px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 470x347px

>>34163355
>Sure they are as long as it is actually useful. Chicks dig a cute intellectual or dreamy professor.
>cute
>dreamy

ie. Must be 6' tall white with a NW1 hairline.

Never heard a women in my 34 years of life call Bill Gates sexy and he's smart, generous, and successful.

You have to be good looking for women to give a shit about anything else.

I'm a doctor and the only guys women lined up to fuck in med school and residency were the tall/handsome Chads.

The rest of us did no better than when we were in undergrad.

Women are not attracted to intelligence. They'll take it as an extra bonus, but only if the looks requirements are met first.

>>34165982
>reach in to my wallet to pay for her child with taxes after she becomes a single mother.

How should this be handled

On one hand, roasties don't deserve taxpayer money for getting knocked up.

On the other hand, children don't deserve to suffer because of their stupid whore mom.

>>34166019
(con't)

People need to stop assuming their is an inherent nobility or "correctness" to our natural evolutionary drives.

No one would claim there is anything "correct" or "admirable" about a man's desire to club a 14 year old girl over the head and rape her, yet that is what many mens' evolutionary drives tell them to do.

So why is that considered bad, but women's drive to form harems with Chads is considered good?

Evolution is not always correct for the greater good. Our species' IQ is dropping.

>>34166083
>(con't)

You are not me. Why did you quote me

>>34166019

If we're going back to nature, those kids should starve in the street and die.

Not all life is valuable or desirable.

We are failing because there are no negative repercussions for irresponsible decisions. Dumb people are reproducing like crazy. Smart people are being more restrained.

>>34166111

Clicked the wrong post. You posted right after me. That >>34166083 was a continuation of:

>>34166006

>>34163281

I think there are three, not two, things that women want. (Or maybe even more.)

>Chads for power
>other races for cock
>betas to survive

You could probably even separate the Chads into "Chads for financial power" and "Chads for intimidation power" though women would rather have both if they could. The bigger point is that women want many things and many are willing to get them from two or more different men, and on top of that they sometimes can't get what they want and have to settle.

>>34166135
But the whore mother is the one who made an irresponsible decision. Her children are the ones who suffer the consequences even though they didn't ask for any of this.

>>34166181

You're better of looking at it like this:

>Chads for sex
>Government for betabux

I used to be a liberal until I realized pretty much all liberal economic policies favor women by creating a safety net that allows them to never be punished for their bad decisions.

I am a single man, yet *I* am buying groceries for Chad's illegitimate children and dumped single moms. Whether I want to or not.

>>34166228

Tough luck. The pain must be spread around. Everywhere in nature, the weak and the mistakes suffer and die. If you want to avoid this, you have to sterilize unfit women, which would never be considered acceptable.

I have chosen not to have kids. I should not have to pay for other peoples' because they didn't plan ahead.

>>34166280
>I used to be a liberal until I realized pretty much all liberal economic policies favor women by creating a safety net that allows them to never be punished for their bad decisions.

I think a better solition is that ONLY men should be able to receive government benefits if they need it. Women should not be able to receive such benefits.

>>34166362

Sorry, nope that won't fly. Either we cut back the handouts across the board and everyone fends for themselves, or we keep supporting Single Stacy and her three bastard kids.

I support cutting back across the board, including NEETbux. NEETbuxers are sucking at the government tits no different than that hypergamous Stacy.

The only people who should be getting something for nothing are people who have legitimately tried to find work (and are still looking) but legitimately can't find anything.

>>34166280
>If you want to avoid this, you have to sterilize unfit women, which would never be considered acceptable.

How do you know it would never be acceptable

100 years ago people would have said fags getting married would never be acceptable if you asked them.

Society's views change.

>>34166469

Yeah, we'll see 50 years from now. Won't matter to me. I'll be an old man dying at that stage. I have no investment in the future of the species beyond that point.

I secretly hope humanity becomes extinct.

>>34162450
>betas risk takers

You got it all wrong alphas are more likely to rape women because they are risk takers

>>34163281
I dont think girls like very intelligent guys either because stupid guys are easier to control.

>>34162450
fuck you i am a good human being i don't deserve to be alone all of my life. i haven't done anything wrong.

>>34162968
You literally treat humans like they`re some species of animal and want to enforce humans being treated like animals. And also humans thinking like animals and acting on their animal instincts. There is nothing good,healthy or sane about this. Humans thinking like humans and using their higher forms of thinking has made humanity go places,not acknowledging and celebrating our animal nature.

>>34164566
>complaining about pseduo-science while also making an appeal to social darwinism
you are fucking retarded son

>>34162374

As long as they take nothing from me (time, taxes, anything) I'm happy to leave them to chad.

>Oh chad dumped you because you got too old/bitchy?

TOUGH SHIT BITCH, SUCK DICKS IN THE GUTTER

>oh anon chads treating me like shit and I want to vent about it to you

FUCK YOU WHORE SUFFER IN SILENCE

>anon I think welfare programs should be more generous to single mothers

FUCK YOU PARASITE, YOU'RE NOT ENTITLED TO MY MONEY GO ASK CHAD FOR CASH

Uh oh bois.
What if all the diversity in the genome is from x, and y is a selector/garbage disposal.
This explains the disproportionately large number of y exclusive genetic disorders; y is historically much more shallow than x.

I think substandard males are fucked and waiting for the death by sabretooth tiger that will never come.

File: 1484385350128.jpg (21KB, 480x356px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 480x356px

>>34166411
If you are well adjusted enough to be self sufficient and have a stable income, then I seriously question your status as a robot. You sound like a turbo normie.

>>34168826

I think a few "substandard males" would have been better off living in sabretooth times.

Plenty of ugly guys have skills that would have made them more desirable back then than they are now.

Women aren't going to fuck a guy who can hunt, kill, butcher and cook a deer these days. Back then they would have.

>>34168928

I'm also a KV wizard. What now?

>>34169008
So by your own admission, you have had hugs and hand holding then

You are a normie.

>>34169062

I'm pretty sure the male virgin rate at my age is less than 0.1%, so I'm at least 1/1000 weird.

But thanks. I have always wanted to be a normie. It's all I ever wanted. I have been here the past 9 years because I failed at it.

>>34168961
No senpai humanity has always existed in social groups no larger than 50.

An autismal vagina drier then and an autismal vagina drier now would possess more or less the same qualities and behavior. Same capacity to make a vag dry up.

Also when has demonstrating skills ever got anyone laid ever? Logically butchers should be knee deep in poocci but no one's ever made this observation.

>>34169114
How old are you anon

And if you're well adjusted enough at any age to have both a stable career AND you're not a KHHV then you are a normie.

>>34169127
Do you really think people back then actually let women choose?

>>34169168

34. Again, I don't think anyone in general society would call a 34 year old male virgin normal unless he was super religious and a priest or something.

>>34169210
At best, you MIGHT be a cyborg. But you are no robot.

>>34169280

Like I give a shit. I'd rather just be fucking normal and having sex like everyone else. One day soon ...

>>34163219
>The problem is that just because he has the right genes to give him a desirable appearance, doesn't mean he has good genes across the board, which is what matters.
this. many chad traits like pushing down weaker peers and being able to deceive and manipulate other humans is incredibly beneficial to the self, but detrimental to the species as a whole.
there should be selective breeding based off of physical health and intelligence.

>>34169301
You don't belong here, Norman. Go away.

>>34169408

I'll leave when I get laid. I've probably been here longer than you have.

>>34163553

That's a heap of bullshit. Feynman, one of the greatest modern physicists, would have stolen your girl while still half thinking about particle physics.

He was a complete Chad.

Being intelligent doesn't mean you have to be an autist beta.

File: 1480003741778.gif (2MB, 316x228px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 316x228px

>>34162374
>robots resent being alone
No, you're thinking about failed normies. Who the fuck even likes to be with other people?

>>34169127

Yes but what would be desirable traits in caveman days?

>Provide food
>Provide shelter
>Provide protection from wild animals/other tribes

The aforementioned guys traits would be more desirable (and make him more desirable) back then than they are today.

You think a cavestacy would survive long enough to pass on her genes if she went with some prettyboy cavechad who couldn't kill?

Today a lot of "chads" would get their asses handed to them by some ugly fucker who spent 10 years doing mma because there was nothing else to do. Today that's not a massive social factor but back then it would have been.

And we all know women will fuck an ugly guy today as long as he can "provide"...

>>34169170
Some sort of behavior was allowed to persist in which women exercised a degree of selection, because that behavior was selected for and persists to the modern day.
Women choosing mates isn't a behavior that sprang up overnight like agriculture.
It's extremely old to be embedded in biology as it is.

File: 1474949674594.gif (405KB, 359x371px) Image search: [Google]

405KB, 359x371px

>>34162968

There are many men who squander their appearance and never have to prove themselves as men.

This is the problem with hereditary monarchy, sure the first man might have earned his position but just because his children have his "potential" doesn't mean they will always express it to the best of their ability, in fact, being born in a privileged position will result in such potential being wasted.

>>34169665
Desirable traits would be status, just as it is now. Your dad would be tribe leader and responsible for decision making. You'd be guaranteed some portion of resources and wouldn't have developed with scarce nutrition. You'd have a large number of siblings to support eachother in the event of injury or death.

Think kings and heirs to the throne. It's a question of social clout and stability of position.

You're right about looks/ugly though. Lot of ugly kings in history.

>>34169797
Back then a father would decide who his daughter would marry.

Like still is the case in clan based societies.

>>34169932
What if she said no? There's a lot of very ancient allegory of women who rejected suitors and the trouble it caused. It's an ancient meme.

>>34169990
Usually wouldn't be the case. Women didn't have high social status back then. Of course if she was her dad's darling or something she could probably influence him to pick the suitor she wanted.

>>34169665
doesn't mean she wouldn't cheat with chad unfortunately

>>34169914
>Lot of ugly kings in history.

Most people in the past were ugly. You can look in old photos or paintings and they're all ugly. People didn't really start to be good looking until modern times.

>>34170045
Hunter gatherer dad probably doesn't care a great deal because he's a busy man, and women are a net resource drain.

I think he'd be glad to have her in someone else's hands but wouldn't care very much who that was.

It's feasible she'd exercise some degree of agency in selection, even if ultimately she's just guided by tingles, as they still are.

>>34170117
Explain Greek statues.

The Chad is a myth.

Everyone has problems. Women aren't perfect judges of character. They see a man who doesn't care and they think it's noble. It could just be because he isn't capable of caring.

Women never evolved the ability to choose between men because they've never had the responsibility. Now they have been given the responsibility, and it turns out they are terrible at it.

>>34170189
>people would never try to make themselves look prettier in their art

If people in the future judge our society by our movies and model photos they'll think we're all hot 10/10s

>>34162374
What are your thoughts on like, multiculturalism

>>34170331
It's quite a length to go to to carve a 15 foot tall Selfie out of marble.

But you're right all media representations of the ideal human form are vanity.
I don't know why models are even paid.

>>34168170
Humans are animals though bro

This is a good read for pseudointellectual borderline schizophrenic rants.