Settle this: will women always be favored?

**musicman.2** · 15th-January-2009

Nova seeker said this. Which to me seems like its a joke.

Here's a clue for you: women will *always* be favored over men. Any guess why? Because they are the limiting factor in reproduction, having far fewer eggs than men have sperm. That genetic favoring continues and permeates throughout civilization. Genetically the vast majority of men are disfavored, naturally, because they are providing less useful DNA to the females. The relative strength of older men compared with older women is genetically irrelevant -- the younger men will protect the tribe much better than the older ones, yet the older women will better help with child rearing than either the younger or the older men. And men are expendable, genetically, because each male individual produces trillions of sperm, whereas one woman produces 300-400 eggs in her whole lifetime. That is why women will always be favored, at every age.

I was agreeing with him up until the point he said

yet the older women will better help with child rearing than either the younger or the older men

I think this guy is a total joke just because of that statement. he thinks older woman can better nurture any child than both a younger man and older woman.

i don't see any evolutionary basis for favoring elderly women over men since they have no eggs.

**novaseeker** · 15th-January-2009

Quote from musicman.2

Nova seeker said this. Which to me seems like its a joke.

I was agreeing with him up until the point he said

I think this guy is a total joke just because of that statement. he thinks older woman can better nurture any child than both a younger man and older woman.

i don't see any evolutionary basis for favoring elderly women over men since they have no eggs.

It's because of group selection. I pointed that out to you. An incremental man is fairly worthless from the group perspective -- sperm are plentiful, and you only need a few alphas to provide enough sperm for all the females. In terms of the group, you don't need the old man as much as you need the old woman, who is wired to nurture in a way that the old man is not. So on a group basis, the incremental man is not that useful, whereas the incremental female -- even if barren -- is nevertheless useful because of her nurturing nature vis-a-vis children. If the older man were a true high status alpha, that would be different because his sperm would be more useful than average, but for an also-ran older man with average or below quality sperm, he is expendable to a much greater degree than an older woman is. That's not a feminist perspective, it's a biological one.

Again, read Steve Moxon's book and the books he cites. Anyway, my last post in this thread. It will be interesting to read other responses, in any case.

**musicman.2** · 15th-January-2009

If women are so hard wired to nurture they would never abuse kids. Once again mind prevails over biology.

If you keep very few guys around and a lot of women tell me who will protect all these women ? 3 guys? will 3 guys hunt for all the food?

and if these 3 guys have genetic mutations the entire population is screwed?

the amount of reproduction needs to be balanced with genetic variability. sure a few men and a lot fo women can have more babies than a balanced number of men and women but honestly does that make a difference if you have all mutated babies?

**shaazam** · 15th-January-2009

they sure will be it is written into the law and some coyly call it affirmative action political correct parlance for blatant discrimination for womyn

any well earned advantage accruing to men id deemed as being horribly unfair by womyn

**Incognito** · 15th-January-2009

I think that men are naturally helpful and protective toward those they love, and even to strangers. I don't think that's going to change despite the fact that feminism has alienated and upset many. I think when men love, they feel a natural inclination to protect, nurture, and preserve who and what they cherish. Men also seem to have a desire to protect and defend the weaker of the species (physically weaker)...that includes women, some men (those that need the help), and children.

**musicman.2** · 15th-January-2009

Tera much of that is socilization in my opinion.

Feminism wants men to change that attitude.

I want to see men continue to be protective.

However I do think women need to step up and become equals in the amount of love , cherishing, protectiveness and nurturing they offer(aren't women supposed to be the nurturing ones anyway).

There is no reason why a woman can't be equally protective. A man is 50% stronger bu he is not bulletproof. that fact that woman are not equally protective just shows the selfishness. Most crimes are committed against men. What does a man have to protect a woman from anyway? What a joke.

Your just excusing female selfishness.

men are all of those things. women are not any of those things. a woman's love is vastly inferior and useless compared to a mans love. it has no value.

**Zuberi** · 15th-January-2009

Yeah women are favored, WHY DO YOU THINK SATAN USES THEM TO DESTROY MEN!?

**Feckless** · 15th-January-2009

Some mythbustering here:

Fathers and nurturing - http://antimisandry.com/news-article...uri-13076.html

Some numbers from here - http://antimisandry.com/fathers-foru...ore-16170.html

MEN CONSIDERING AT-HOME FATHERHOOD
37 percent
careerbuilder.com, 2007

"Four-in-ten"
careerbuilder.com, 2006
rebeldad.com analysis
49 percent
careerbuilder.com, 2005
rebeldad.com analysis
43 percent
careerbuilder.com, 2004

56 percent
Spike TV survey, 2004
rebeldad.com analysis
40 percent
careerbuilder.com, 2003
rebeldad.com analysis
"Almost half" (UK)
Pregnancy and Birth Magazine survey, 2004 (based on newspaper report)
rebeldad.com analysis
"One-third" (UK)
Pregnancy and Birth Magazine survey, 2003 (based on newspaper report now in paid archives)
rebeldad.com analysis

**Otis the Sweaty** · 15th-January-2009

men are much more nurturing than women. It's just another thing that we are superior at. Women are better than men in no ways whatsoever. Men are like gods. Women are like slugs.

**brian44** · 15th-January-2009

Quote from novaseeker

The relative strength of older men compared with older women is genetically irrelevant -- the younger men will protect the tribe much better than the older ones, yet the older women will better help with child rearing than either the younger or the older men.

I didn't see the original thread so I may have read this out of context, but on face value I strongly disagree with it. Before civilisation, the mere act of achieving old age for a man would have been extremely relevant. A mark of survival in a very hostile environment. Survivability is at least as important as other traits such as aggression, dominance, size etc. It would have been an attractive trait to at least some women.