This guy made a critique of the conflation “mating success = number of partners” that is done here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/BlackPillScience/comments/b2kg36/the_reason_why_many_of_the_studies_posted_on_here/
I don’t see what is so wrong with his criticism, or why it’s so bad that there needs to be such vitriol. Understandably if you’re someone who can’t get a relationship or laid then the difference isn’t something concerning to you. But I feel like there is a sense where the conflation ignores different mating strategies as well as different psychological profiles that would lead to one (attractive) person to pursue more sex than another attractive one.
For example, is it possible that the psychological profile that causes one to become a criminal or treat others like shit also predisposes a person to pursuing casual sex over long term relationships? If Chris Hemsworth had two different personalities, one confident, loving, and loyal (not a beta), while the other was sociopathic, a criminal, and not loyal, would the first or second have a larger potential mating pool?
[–]eduardkoopman5 points6 points7 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]eduardkoopman1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]eduardkoopman2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Digedag5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]incelicious5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link