Trusted, Automoderated users
17,538
edits
Female subordination: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
A result is that the act of penetration itself acts as dominance signal as it is the consequence of winning prior contests, hence it becomes a desirable trait in males that females, otherwise coy due to their higher parental investment, "surrender" to. | A result is that the act of penetration itself acts as dominance signal as it is the consequence of winning prior contests, hence it becomes a desirable trait in males that females, otherwise coy due to their higher parental investment, "surrender" to. | ||
An alternative or additional explanation is that men do not want to waste their resources on another man's offspring, so they have a strong preference for exclusive sexual access to their woman as a measure to avoid being [[cuckoldry|cuckolded]]. Not just men have this preference, but entire families that may invest their family wealth in the offspring as well, and were often usually heavily involved in partner choices. This should imply women have been selected to be obedient, agreeable, childlike and weak, i.e. easily controllable like a child. | An alternative or additional explanation is that men do not want to waste their resources on another man's offspring, so they have a strong preference for exclusive sexual access to their woman as a measure to avoid being [[cuckoldry|cuckolded]]. Not just men have this preference, but men's mothers and their entire families that may invest their family wealth in the offspring as well, and were often usually heavily involved in partner choices.<ref>https://quillette.com/2018/11/25/on-the-nature-of-patriarchy/</ref><ref>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S109051381730363X</ref> Such behavior can plausibly also be adaptive by kin selection. This is also thought to fuel female intrasexual competition by gossip and accusations of sluttiness also explaining what historically females have massively contributed to restraining one another's sexuality.<ref>http://www.femininebeauty.info/suppression.pdf</ref> This should imply women have been selected to be obedient, agreeable, childlike and weak, i.e. easily controllable like a child. | ||
Another explanation could be (like [[Schopenhauer]] claimed) that women are childlike and subordinative because women are adapted to take care of young children, so they are more similar to them psychologically and this helps them relate to them. | |||
== Cross-cultural evidence female subordination == | == Cross-cultural evidence female subordination == | ||
One sees women to be heavily controlled and sequestered away in many higher cultures. | |||
* '''Japanese gait''': | * '''Japanese gait''': | ||
* '''Orientals''': | * '''Orientals''': Islam and Purdah | ||
* '''Chinese foot binding'''<ref>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513810000279</ref> | |||
* '''The ancient Greeks''' kept their women locked up 24/7 (apart from the more feminist Spartans). | |||
== Tantrums, shit tests and nastiness == | == Tantrums, shit tests and nastiness == | ||
=== Feminism as a shit test === | |||
In the [[manosphere]] it has often been suggested that [[feminism]] has the character of a shit test, essentially a to be restrained in response to their more provocative claims. | |||
== Masochism == | == Masochism == | ||
Hybristophilia, Stockholm syndrome | Hybristophilia, Stockholm syndrome | ||
Many in the [[manosphere]], including [[Jordan Peterson]] suggested feminist women subconsciously like [[Islam]] due to the way it subordinates the women. | |||
== References == | == References == | ||
| Line 26: | Line 40: | ||
* [[Cuckoldry]] | * [[Cuckoldry]] | ||
* [[Foid#Foid_psychology|Foid psychology]] | * [[Foid#Foid_psychology|Foid psychology]] | ||
{{Redpill}} | |||