113
edits
Dominance hierarchy: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
added connections
(specified who the king is) |
m (added connections) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Aggressive dominance is linked to a fast [[life history]] strategy, while non-aggressive dominance can be regarded as a slow life history strategy. Human dominance hierarchies tend toward the latter due to [[neoteny]] and a high prevalence of [[arranged marriage]] rather than free mate choice which have likely resulted from [[wikipedia:Self-domestication|self-domestication]]. | Aggressive dominance is linked to a fast [[life history]] strategy, while non-aggressive dominance can be regarded as a slow life history strategy. Human dominance hierarchies tend toward the latter due to [[neoteny]] and a high prevalence of [[arranged marriage]] rather than free mate choice which have likely resulted from [[wikipedia:Self-domestication|self-domestication]]. | ||
For human males, there is a link between social dominance and [[reproductive success]]. This link is, however, much weaker than in closely related nonhuman primates (r = .19 vs r = .8).<ref>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27601650/</ref> | For human [[Men|males]], there is a link between social dominance and [[reproductive success]]. This link is, however, much weaker than in closely related nonhuman primates (r = .19 vs r = .8).<ref>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27601650/</ref> | ||
== Manosphere == | == Manosphere == | ||
The idea of an overall, necessary, mostly fixed, and possibly genetic sociosexual hierarchy in humans has been mainly promoted seriously by various traditionalists such as [[Vox Day]] and [[Jordan Peterson]] and thus has had influence on the [[manosphere]] as [[Traditionalist conservatism|traditionalists]] entered the manosphere in the 2010s. The modern mainstream concept of a genetic, inevitable, necessary, or extremely fixed sociosexual hierarchy was also inspired by more mainstream media/literature and [[PUA|pick-up-artistry]] which was in turn inspired by scientist [[David Mech|David Mech's]] concept of an 'alpha wolf', which David later retracted.<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20151023133410/http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2014/sep/24/my-bad-alpha-wolf-term-outmoded/</ref><ref>Scientist David Mech addresses readers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNtFgdwTsbU</ref> | The idea of an overall, necessary, mostly fixed, and possibly genetic sociosexual hierarchy in humans has been mainly promoted seriously by various traditionalists such as [[Vox Day]] and [[Jordan Peterson]] and thus has had influence on the [[manosphere]] as [[Traditionalist conservatism|traditionalists]] entered the manosphere in the 2010s. The modern mainstream concept of a genetic, inevitable, necessary, or extremely fixed sociosexual hierarchy was also inspired by more mainstream media/literature and [[PUA|pick-up-artistry]] which was in turn inspired by scientist [[David Mech|David Mech's]] concept of an 'alpha wolf', which David later retracted.<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20151023133410/http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2014/sep/24/my-bad-alpha-wolf-term-outmoded/</ref><ref>Scientist David Mech addresses readers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNtFgdwTsbU</ref> | ||
While small hierarchies at a local level are plausibly rooted in human evolutionary past, the immensely large hierarchies of modern nation states and large cooperation are more alienated from the natural setting. While redpillers and dating coaches etc. focus on dominance signaling at the local scale, Jordan Peterson attempts to justify the hierarchy for entire nation states, e.g. by the overall incentive structure it provides.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lF-bXNQ4wzs</ref> | While small hierarchies at a local level are plausibly rooted in human evolutionary past, the immensely large hierarchies of modern nation states and large cooperation are more alienated from the natural setting. While redpillers and dating coaches etc. focus on dominance signaling at the local scale, Jordan Peterson attempts to justify the hierarchy for entire nation states, e.g. by the overall incentive structure it provides.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lF-bXNQ4wzs</ref> | ||
==Self-described incels on the dominance hierarchy== | ==Self-described incels on the dominance hierarchy== | ||
Self-described [[incels]] mainly see ranks in terms of ''sexual status and looks'' because incels think these play a widely underappreciated role for social acceptance. Incels use their own terminology to refer to different ranks of each sex: [[Chad]], [[Normie]], [[Virgin]], [[Stacy]] and [[Becky]]. The ''female virgin'' is not a low ranking female because virginity is only detrimental to men, and actually ''beneficial'' to women.<ref>https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#Males_gained_peer_status_through_having_had_sex_and_females_lost_peer_status</ref> | Self-described [[incels]] mainly see ranks in terms of ''sexual status and looks'' because incels think these play a widely underappreciated role for social acceptance. Incels use their own terminology to refer to different ranks of each sex: [[Chad]], [[Normie]], [[Virgin]], [[Stacy]] and [[Becky]]. The ''female virgin'' is not a low ranking [[Femoid|female]] because virginity is only detrimental to men, and actually ''beneficial'' to women.<ref>https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#Males_gained_peer_status_through_having_had_sex_and_females_lost_peer_status</ref> | ||
==Overview== | ==Overview== | ||
Social animals naturally compete for access to resources and mating opportunities which are limited in quantity and quality. | Social animals naturally compete for access to resources and mating opportunities which are limited in quantity and quality. | ||