|
|
| Re: IQ and Sex (764599) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: IQ and Sex |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Wed Apr 13 16:30:35 2011, in response to Re: IQ and Sex, posted by shiznit1987 on Wed Apr 13 15:06:44 2011. Women, weither they admit it or not, are hard wired to want the caveman prototype of strong and hot headed.Haha I wouldn't quite go that far, I find a lot of women are less attracted to the total jock prick (is that redundant?) type than others. But overall, yes, more alpha is better than less alpha. Back in the days where people were far less civilized and might meant right, a strong man meant strong kids plus protection/power for the woman. Strong ≈ high status and important for quite some time. But the thing to remember is that Europe, the Near East and East Asia have been civilized for a long time (~5000 years continuously in the case of China). Being important, at least enough to raise a brood, didn't depend on being "big tough guy" as much as it did for hunter-gatherer, and to a less extent, pastoral societies. Brains become more important. Hence that's why these groups became less masculine. I don't honestly think this hurdle will ever be overcome. Being autistic women don't want to be within 100 miles of me, nevermind in bed, Actually, people with Asperger's and other ASD's have made several useful contributions to human kind. Like with other traits that persist in a minority of the population and "disorders" (like ADD), it evolved because it does something helpful for the population overall (orchid theory). It's been said that ASD are just as exaggeration of masculine traits, not socially but intellectually, traits that (in moderation) proved useful to developing Europe. Interestingly, ASD's are much more common in males. |
|
|
|