I was reading an old NYT article and it talked about happiness. The article talks about how so many of us think that wealth, fame or multiple sexual partners will bring us happiness.

There was a part in it that I thought might be useful to people still struggling with redpill ideology especially when it comes to men's "biological need' for multiple partners because he needs to 'spread his seed'.

Red pill often sells the idea that men have a biological need for multiple partners and this is okay but if a woman has multiple partners then she is 'for the streets'. I am not going to argue about if it's okay for men and women to cheat or have multiple partners simultaneously or to have a high 'body count'. I'm just interested in the pursuit of sex beyond one partner.

What I find interesting is that the research gives a really useful perspective on the idea of "spreading your seed". It shows that having multiple partners (regardless of your gender) would make sense from a biology perspective (increasing the population of the world) but it would certainly not increase your levels of happiness.

Here's an excerpt from the article:

"From an evolutionary perspective, it makes sense that we are wired to seek fame, wealth and sexual variety. These things make us more likely to pass on our DNA. Had your cave-man ancestors not acquired some version of these things (a fine reputation for being a great rock sharpener; multiple animal skins), they might not have found enough mating partners to create your lineage.

But here’s where the evolutionary cables have crossed: We assume that things we are attracted to will relieve our suffering and raise our happiness. My brain says, “Get famous.” It also says, “Unhappiness is lousy.” I conflate the two, getting, “Get famous and you’ll be less unhappy.”

But that is Mother Nature’s cruel hoax. She doesn’t really care either way whether you are unhappy — she just wants you to want to pass on your genetic material. If you conflate intergenerational survival with well-being, that’s your problem, not nature’s. And matters are hardly helped by nature’s useful idiots in society, who propagate a popular piece of life-ruining advice: “If it feels good, do it.” Unless you share the same existential goals as protozoa, this is often flat-out wrong."

​

Full story can be found here: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/20/opinion/sunday/arthur-c-brooks-love-people-not-pleasure.html#:~:text=%E2%80%9CI%20have%20diligently%20numbered%20the,he%20believed%20%E2%80%94%20it%20was%20unhappiness.