Thread replies: 11
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: 24247b435e21e50f08596e9cf2d81632.jpg (74KB, 800x452px) Image search:
[Google]
74KB, 800x452px
I have a theory about why life might be easier for women than men, in modern society.
In the animal world, males and females tend to have equally difficult lives. You might say "but females have to care for young, while men just dump their sperm and beat it". This is true, but it still ends up being hard to be a male, since you have to work very hard to find a female to mate with. And you're much more likely to be a failure and never mate. An extreme example of this is the birds of paradise. Take a look at this poor son of a bitch:
https://youtu.be/W7QZnwKqopo?t=2m6s
This is all well understood by biologists. But here is my theory: Society has done a lot to mitigate the costs to females of having kids. For one, giving birth used to be like playing Russian roulette, but thanks to modern science, death from giving birth is almost unheard of. Secondly, we have laws that ensure the man provides 18 years of support, on par with what the mother provides in terms of resources. And we have paternity tests to take away the uncertainty from parentage, which often hung women out to dry in the past.
Meanwhile, it's still just as hard as ever for men to impress mates, since it's a zero sum game. A lot of effort has been expended by men to attract more mates (fancy cars and winning nobel prizes) but all this does is allow some men to do better while others do worse.
Thoughts?
>>
Is life really all that much easier for women? Seems pretty shitty if you ask me. You gotta deal with periods, you gotta worry more about STDs because your vagina is basically a bacterial/protozoan incubator compared to a urethra which is harder to infect, nobody takes you seriously because you're a woman, you gotta waste time applying makeup. I could go on, but I think I've made my point. I'm glad I was born a male.
>>
>>8419012
My explanation is simpler.
Western society has for the last age and a half put women on a sky scrapper of a pedestal and tries its best to please women.
>>
There are ups and downs for both sexes in society. I do feel that men typically have a harder time finding a mate, which as you stated, is likely the result of the biological drives of females. Females, at least in nature, want to be picky about their mate, because due to the sheer length of pregnancy and rearing a child would be strenuous or dangerous if the father was incompetent. However, on the flip side of the coin, men who have many desired traits get laid all the time. It's really an all or nothing type scenario- either you're a lucky stud or a poor dud.
-coming from a female
>>
>>8419025
I'm glad I was born a gay male
>>
Also, biology likely plays a major part in male sexual frustration. Men are inclined to mate to reproduce, but when they have less desirable traits, they can easily get pent up. This could partially attribute to why some people partake in sexual violence. Statistically, men rape more than women, but it's also harder for you guys to get laid. Sexual drive is embedded in our brains and hormones, not having sex for extended periods of time is actually unhealthy and can cause hormonal imbalances- which can lead to irrationality
>>
>>8419025
There's really no way to measure how all the problems unique to women measure up to all the problems unique to men. This is why fights over who has it harder often go nowhere.
What I'm trying to do is point out that in nature, both sexes tend to have an equal number of problems, so we can assume all the problems men have are roughly as bad as all the problems women have. BUT, when you look at modern society, we've been able to make things easier for women (tampons, birth control, and all the things about childcare that I mentioned) but we haven't (and sort of can't) solve the problems men have.
>>
>>8419032
You make a lot of good points, about how sexual success tends to be all-or-nothing with males.
I just want to point out that, when you really look at statistics, things aren't THAT unequal. Humans are not like otters, who pair off and mate monogamously for life. But we're also not like seals, where one alpha-seal gets a massive harem and the left of the seals are left out in the literal cold. And, as far as I can see, we're closer to the otters than we are to the seals.
>>
>>8419012
the relative difficulties in life for male vs female go so far beyond dangers of childbirth vs effort in attracting a mate that your theory is for all intents and purposes... useless
>>
>>8419084
Oh I know, there are more factors than that. I was just presenting several examples.
Human sexuality is a fun area- biological drives to survive and evolution all play major parts.
Sometimes sex is not just for reproduction- it could just be to keep things like hormones in check, to relieve stress, relax. ect.
For example, some primates have orgies for pleasure, or to stop fights.
However, even in these circumstances males can have a hard time finding a mate because of the previously stated factors.
>>
>>8419100
>Sometimes sex is not just for reproduction
Something weird definitely happened with humans and sex.
Most animals are pretty efficient when it comes to sex. Once a month, when a female is in heat, she'll have sex a few times, and then get back to her life. We even see this sexual conservatism in some of our closest ancestors (though not bonobos it appears.)
Yet in humans, sex started serving other roles. Women will have lots of sex even when not ovulating, and even appear to have evolved to hide their ovulation cycles (unlike most animals that advertise it.)
Though that said, we're actually still pretty sexually conservative at the end of the day. Despite the fact that many people consider sex to be their most pleasurable activity, the average adult only spends 4 minutes a day having sex. Compare that to the hours we spend on the internet and netflix.
Thread posts: 11
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1