This Will Never Happen

[Bobcat Fraser]

I got this idea from a forum that will not be named. Bob is a rich lawyer in his forties. He's a very handsome man with a very high IQ. He was born and raised in a very wealthy enclave. He won a powerlifting championship when he was in college. His wife is a shy housewife in her twenties. She's a very pretty woman with a much lower IQ. She was born and raised in an impoverished region. She is much smaller than Bob, and she is weaker than most women her age. "So what?", you reply. Okay, reverse the genders in the above scenario so that the new scenario is *identical* in all respects except for gender. I bet that no male or female, on the Apricity Forum, would be in such a relationship.

[Stefan]

Eurasian women historically selected men for security, as the harsh cold environments weren't suited for women to hunt, farm, etc.

Eurasian men selected women for their beauty, because it represented healthy children.

The opposite is true for tropical populations. :)

[Osprey]

Eurasian women historically selected men for security, as the harsh cold environments weren't suited for women to hunt, farm, etc.

Eurasian men selected women for their beauty, because it represented healthy children.

The opposite is true for tropical populations. :)

South Asians and Arabids are focused on financial security.
Africans on, the robustness and toughness of their spouse, to survive the harsh envoirnment.

[Stefan]

South Asians and Arabids are focused on financial security.
Africans on, the robustness and toughness of their spouse, to survive the harsh envoirnment.


In primates with little pair bonding, there can be much promiscuity. Males therefore compete with each other not only in the number of females they mate with but in the amount of sperm they produce, because if a female has mated with several males, the one that deposits the most sperm has an advantage. When chimpanzee females are in heat they are extremely promiscuous. As a consequence, male chimpanzees have evolved the largest ratio of testicle weight to body weight of any primate.

Humans pursue similar strategies. In the promiscuous tropics, men competed by producing more sperm. Africans, therefore, have the largest testicles and Asians have the smallest. Mr. Fuerle notes that testicles, like brains, are very costly, and increased size in either leaves fewer resources for other organs.

The fact that women in the tropics could support themselves and their young may have had the sinister effect of making rape more biologically adaptive. In cold climates, where women and children could not survive without a man, the impulse to rape was seldom passed on because any resulting child was likely to die. In the tropics, where mother and child had a better chance of surviving, it would have been maladaptive not to rape. This may explain high rates of rape among African populations.

Self-supporting females in the tropics also meant that dominant men could maintain more than one woman, whereas in the north, it was beyond the abilities of most men to support more than one woman and her children. In the north, because it was the sex that hunts that could offer or withhold meat, it was men, rather than the women, who were in a better bargaining position for choosing mates. They selected for beauty, which is a good proxy for health and fertility and this, according to Mr. Fuerle, led to increased beauty in Eurasian women.

African men, on the other hand, chose multiple wives on the basis of their ability to gather food or raise crops rather than beauty. At the same time, polygamy meant that some men had no wives at all, and the remaining, smaller number of women were in a position to take their pick from among the men. Since African women, unlike northern women, could support themselves, they chose men, not according to whether they were “good providers,” but according to their beauty. Thus, writes Mr. Fuerle, African men are more handsome than African women. This may also explain data that suggest African women have higher IQs than African men: Since women selected men for beauty rather than ability, there was not as much of a premium on intelligence.

Mr. Fuerle points out that Eurasian women who live in advanced societies can now support themselves, and need not mate with the men who can best provide food and shelter. This means they can choose according to appearance — which means future generations of Eurasian men may be more handsome but less intelligent.

Another racial trait that may have been influenced by environment is the willingness to cooperate. In the north, men had to work together to bring down big game and to establish rules for sharing meat. Cooperation and respect for rules were less necessary closer to the equator, and this may explain high rates of crime and sociopathy among Africans.

[Stefan]

*Moved to the Dating & Relationships sub-forum*

[Bobcat Fraser]

This thread isn't about all of that. It's a hypothetical that shows that we're still stuck in sex roles that have their origins at the beginning of time. Women still prefer bigger and stronger men, for instance. That's still true for "progressive feminists".

[Stefan]

This thread isn't about all of that. It's a hypothetical that shows that we're still stuck in sex roles that have their origins at the beginning of time. Women still prefer bigger and stronger men, for instance. That's still true for "progressive feminists".

Could it not be something biological, at least partially? It would make sense to me that a woman would want a big and strong man because who they're attracted to is determined by who would benefit them the most biologically in a natural setting. Attractiveness probably has a strong tie with natural and social selection. I'm sure in ethnic groups that have a different means of selection, like Ashkenazi Jews for example, this is different.

[Sarmatian]

This thread isn't about all of that. It's a hypothetical that shows that we're still stuck in sex roles that have their origins at the beginning of time. Women still prefer bigger and stronger men, for instance. That's still true for "progressive feminists".

Do you think those roles are obsolete now? Or there is still some practical value in them?

[rhiannon]

I got this idea from a forum that will not be named. Bob is a rich lawyer in his forties. He's a very handsome man with a very high IQ. He was born and raised in a very wealthy enclave. He won a powerlifting championship when he was in college. His wife is a shy housewife in her twenties. She's a very pretty woman with a much lower IQ. She was born and raised in an impoverished region. She is much smaller than Bob, and she is weaker than most women her age. "So what?", you reply. Okay, reverse the genders in the above scenario so that the new scenario is *identical* in all respects except for gender. I bet that no male or female, on the Apricity Forum, would be in such a relationship.

Probably wouldn't be found on this forum....but there are certainly a large number of highly accomplished women whose preferences show clear bias in favor of your blue collar hardhat type.

[Bobcat Fraser]

Do you think those roles are obsolete now? Or there is still some practical value in them?

The main point is that females are "wired" to prefer "superior" males, no matter what they say to the contrary. Males, on the other hand, mostly prefer to be in the "superior" role.

[Bobcat Fraser]

Probably wouldn't be found on this forum....but there are certainly a large number of highly accomplished women whose preferences show clear bias in favor of your blue collar hardhat type.

I don't doubt that. No woman would mate with a smaller, weaker, dumber, younger, poorer man, though. We see men dating and wedding women like that all the time, and we think nothing of it. I can't name one example of a girl who would like to be like "Bob" in the first post, though. Let's face it. If you were single, you and most women wouldn't go for a much smaller and much younger man, even if he looked like Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt. You just don't see things like that. Few men would want to be in that role, either.

[Absinthe]

The main point is that females are "wired" to prefer "superior" males, no matter what they say to the contrary. Males, on the other hand, mostly prefer to be in the "superior" role.
Not in Sweden :D

[rhiannon]

I don't doubt that. No woman would mate with a smaller, weaker, dumber, younger, poorer man, though. We see men dating and wedding women like that all the time, and we think nothing of it. I can't name one example of a girl who would like to be like "Bob" in the first post, though. Let's face it. If you were single, you and most women wouldn't go for a much smaller and much younger man, even if he looked like Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt. You just don't see things like that. Few men would want to be in that role, either.

Men are programmed to gravitate toward women they can dominate and therefore assume what they feel is their rightful role as *head* of the family unit.

Not all men of course, but ones which are looking for women significantly smaller, weaker, and less intelligent.

It may be what draws a lot of non Asian men to Asian women...who are generally very petite and not that strong...BUT, they are deceptive because many Asian women are extremely intelligent and therefore can be very cunning/manipulative.

[Bobcat Fraser]

Could it not be something biological, at least partially? It would make sense to me that a woman would want a big and strong man because who they're attracted to is determined by who would benefit them the most biologically in a natural setting. Attractiveness probably has a strong tie with natural and social selection. I'm sure in ethnic groups that have a different means of selection, like Ashkenazi Jews for example, this is different.

Let's put it this way, Stefan. A woman in her thirties wants to date you. She's beautiful, but she's twice as big (muscular) and strong (athletic) as you are. She's also a brain surgeon. Let's say that she's a *very* wealthy woman, and she bought a penthouse for you. How would you react? It might sound enticing and exciting, but I doubt that you would go for it. Most guys wouldn't feel comfortable in the role that *thousands* of women take.

[Bobcat Fraser]

Not in Sweden :D

There are no Swedish women like "Bob", meaning that none of them would marry a man like "Bob's" wife. It likely sounds zany, but it's almost definitely true.

[Stefan]

Let's put it this way, Stefan. A woman in her thirties wants to date you. She's beautiful, but she's twice as big (muscular) and strong (athletic) as you are. She's also a brain surgeon. Let's say that she's a *very* wealthy woman, and she bought a penthouse for you. How would you react? It might sound enticing and exciting, but I doubt that you would go for it. Most guys wouldn't feel comfortable in the role that *thousands* of women take.

Well that probably has to do with the male mind vs. the female mind, as well as sociological influences. Males are by far more impulsive than females and don't feel content with not doing something with themselves outside of home-life: at least most don't. The differences in the sexes shape this sociological principle rather than vice-versa. This also goes back to prehistoric man. Women were, on average, physically less advantaged and therefore relied on strong, intelligent, and resourceful men to take care of them and their children. In return, men gained children from women and passed on their genes, which is a biological motivation, a subconscious impulse rather than a conscious decision. Much of the remnants of this subconscious desire is evident still even today in a different society that looks down (in general) on those who choose traditional lifestyles and roles.

[Bobcat Fraser]

Men are programmed to gravitate toward women they can dominate and therefore assume what they feel is their rightful role as *head* of the family unit.

Not all men of course, but ones which are looking for women significantly smaller, weaker, and less intelligent.

It may be what draws a lot of non Asian men to Asian women...who are generally very petite and not that strong...BUT, they are deceptive because many Asian women are extremely intelligent and therefore can be very cunning/manipulative.

That's right, Rhiannon. It's wired into the brains of both men and women. It's not limited to cultural norms. Most people wouldn't be comfortable in reverse gender roles taken to the extremes found in the scenario. I doubt that you would be. I doubt that any honest male or female on this forum would claim to be okay with it. It's unspoken, but it's there. It shows that we all expect the man to be *the* man, even in the year 2012.

[rhiannon]

That's right, Rhiannon. It's wired into the brains of both men and women. It's not limited to cultural norms. Most people wouldn't be comfortable in reverse gender roles taken to the extremes found in the scenario. I doubt that you would be. I doubt that any honest male or female on this forum would claim to be okay with it. It's unspoken, but it's there. It shows that we all expect the man to be *the* man, even in the year 2012.
And woman to be the woman:D

[Bobcat Fraser]

Well that probably has to do with the male mind vs. the female mind, as well as sociological influences. Males are by far more impulsive than females and don't feel content with not doing something with themselves outside of home-life: at least most don't. The differences in the sexes shape this sociological principle rather than vice-versa. This also goes back to prehistoric man. Women were, on average, physically less advantaged and therefore relied on strong, intelligent, and resourceful men to take care of them and their children. In return, men gained children from women and passed on their genes, which is a biological motivation, a subconscious impulse rather than a conscious decision. Much of the remnants of this subconscious desire is evident still even today in a different society that looks down (in general) on those who choose traditional lifestyles and roles.

That's true, but even beyond the historical and scientific explanations for it, the fact remains that both men and women just would *not* be comfortable with such a relationship. That goes for "enlightened", progressive feminists too. I don't know how this dynamic works for gay individuals. It's safe to say that this is how it works for straight people, though. Underlying it all is the societal expectation that men should be superior in all ways to women. That may sound incredibly sexist on the surface, but it's really true. If it wasn't true, you would see more women like "Bob" with boyfriends and husbands like his wife. There are so many couples like the one in the scenario that we don't even think twice about it, but a gender switch literally could make the news.

[Bobcat Fraser]

And woman to be the woman:D

And dog to be *the* dog. Manipulating both to get treats.

[Sarmatian]

The main point is that females are "wired" to prefer "superior" males, no matter what they say to the contrary. Males, on the other hand, mostly prefer to be in the "superior" role.

I think you're not seeing the whole picture. All men posses a Free Will which gives them ability to act as they see fit. A man can choose to follow others or stick to his own path based strictly on his own decisions.

Women don't have it. They are all followers, they can't decide for themselves. They need a masculine figure to follow or to borrow the pattern of strong-willed behavior. This figure could be a father, a husband or even some social structure. Sadly today majority of women do not want to follow men around them. They are brainwashed into following artificial social construct. Without a real masculine figure in front of them they have an illusion of their own strong will and independence.

[Bobcat Fraser]

I think you're not seeing the whole picture. All men posses a Free Will which gives them ability to act as they see fit. A man can choose to follow others or stick to his own path based strictly on his own decisions.

Women don't have it. They are all followers, they can't decide for themselves. They need a masculine figure to follow or to borrow the pattern of strong-willed behavior. This figure could be a father, a husband or even some social structure. Sadly today majority of women do not want to follow men around them. They are brainwashed into following artificial social construct. Without a real masculine figure in front of them they have an illusion of their own strong will and independence.

I appreciate your reply. I understand your point. I agree with you to a certain extent. Some females need and want a male authority figure. Others don't. Many women also have complete independence and a strong will. My main point is that it's likely that almost no women would like to be a female version of Bob, primarily because of inherited expectations based on gender roles. I think that your theory also plays a role in one of the explanations as to why this is.

[Osprey]

I think you're not seeing the whole picture. All men posses a Free Will which gives them ability to act as they see fit. A man can choose to follow others or stick to his own path based strictly on his own decisions.

Women don't have it. They are all followers, they can't decide for themselves. They need a masculine figure to follow or to borrow the pattern of strong-willed behavior. This figure could be a father, a husband or even some social structure. Sadly today majority of women do not want to follow men around them. They are brainwashed into following artificial social construct. Without a real masculine figure in front of them they have an illusion of their own strong will and independence.

Simply speaking, there are more 'men' following the masculine role and less 'women'.
Weak and useless or petty men also follow the role, women do.
Its just that they are not in the majority.

[Incal]

I wouldn't really care to be honest. I've always liked big ladies and I have never cared about money that much, I wouldn't even mind staying home and doing the chores ala Tony Micelli. I guess it's because I've always been ahead of my time.

[Bobcat Fraser]

I wouldn't really care to be honest. I've always liked big ladies and I have never cared about money that much, I wouldn't even mind staying home and doing the chores ala Tony Micelli. I guess it's because I've always been ahead of my time.

That's how you feel right now. I have no reason to think that you're kidding or lying. Something tells me that you really wouldn't like the situation if you were in it, though. It likely would go against your grain.

[Incal]

That's how you feel right now. I have no reason to think that you're kidding or lying. Something tells me that you really wouldn't like the situation if you were in it, though. It likely would go against your grain.

Dunno, when me and my brothers were born my dad left his job for some years to raise us, so it's also probably some kind of role model I'm following. As I said, I don't see anything wrong with it.

[Bobcat Fraser]

Dunno, when me and my brothers were born my dad left his job for some years to raise us, so it's also probably some kind of role model I'm following. As I said, I don't see anything wrong with it.

Read the first post. Imagine that your wife is like Bob in all ways, and imagine that you are like his wife in all ways. The scenario deals with more than just incomes and occupations. I bet that might change things.

[Sarmatian]

...


...

Question to both of you:

What do you mean by 'gender role', is it an evolved social construct or hardcoded part of human nature predefined by instincts, or some else?

[Osprey]

Question to both of you:

What do you mean by 'gender role', is it an evolved social construct or hardcoded part of human nature predefined by instincts, or some else?

The Role is constant.
Male intellect and physique is suited to one aspect, while female to another.
However, its the variety and free will of human life, which permits some uncertainty.
So, its like males who recognize their roles and follow it become dominant.
Men who do not, become passive whiners.
Same for women.
But, personally i think its more of an adaptive strategy than some God given plan.

[Bobcat Fraser]

Question to both of you:

What do you mean by 'gender role', is it an evolved social construct or hardcoded part of human nature predefined by instincts, or some else?

It's both nature and nurture. As a rule, each gender fills a defined role in society, although this has changed much throughout the years. Part of it is hardwired in the brain, so to speak. Part of it stems from a given culture's expectations.

It's there, though, and feminist rhetoric won't change that. For instance, boys and girls tend to favor games and toys that fit their genders. That's true even when culture doesn't play a role in influencing their choices. Unisexual activists live in a world of fantasy.

[Svipdag]

Although they have always been objects of ridicule, there have always been and still are some feckless little wimps married to domineering Amazons. The henpecked husband is not just a literary convention. He is the ineffectual domestic male in your theoretical case.


"Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose." - Alphonse Karr

[Bobcat Fraser]

Although they have always been objects of ridicule, there have always been and still are some feckless little wimps married to domineering Amazons. The henpecked husband is not just a literary convention. He is the ineffectual domestic male in your theoretical case.


"Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose." - Alphonse Karr

I had some friends like that. Their wives acted like their bosses or mothers. They had to get their permission to do anything. I'm surprised that they didn't have curfews.