EDIT: Shouldn't have used the word BroScience as it is politically loaded language.

Disclaimer: I started reading Red Pill material because I think it has a lot of value for thinking about relationships and has a ton of practical benefits. I am NOT here to attack the practical benefits or efficacy of the TRP theory. I just want to bring in my background from Anthropology and Human Evolutionary History to further the conversation. Also, I am male and not even remotely a feminist.

There is too much BroScienceTM going on here about the fundamental nature of women and people in general!

First lets define some terms for this discussion centered around our shared human ancestry. I'd also appreciate if you'd come at this with an open mind and try not to instinctively label me as a feminist, there more perspectives than these -isms, what isn't TRP isn't Feminism.

**Binary Thinking: Choosing the opposite ends of two scales and deciding any concept or idea must fall between or along this scale between two contrasting ideas.

Popular science= Meme or idea's that get perpetuated because they are sticky or appeal to existing narratives rather than anything based on physical science or, in this case, anthropological records. Almost like a song that gets stuck in your head, idea's can do the same thing.

Flinstonization: projecting popular culture back on the past to describe and theorize about the life of Hunter-gatherers.

Social Construct: behavior originating from cultural attitudes, learned behavior.**

Most of TRP Theory on the nature of women revolves around some key assumptions and narratives.

The gist of the logic goes something like:

-therefore, if, thentype logic = " --->”

*Women weaker than men--> rough nasty brutish short life (Thomas hobbes)---> Monogamy ----> Therefore need protection from predators and other males--->Nuclear Family Structure---> Women need access to resources---> Therefore, seduction and status seeking of high value males ---> More women survive with high values males -----> Evolutionary BroScience ---> Women are hopelessly mindless status seeking machines by nature for their own survival. *

Let’s dissect this BroScience together!

Women are weaker than men obviously.

Yabba Dabba Doo!

The idea of nasty, short, savage and brutish, lives comes from Thomas Hobbes who grew up in early Industrial Revolution England, which was really nasty, brutish and short. Remember your history books with the blackened cities from burning coal and sewage in the middle of the street. Hunter Gather's lived 13,500+ years ago and had average heights similar to Modern men. The short lifespan comes from studies that average high infant mortality (average a lot of 0's with a few 65-75 year lifespans and you get somewhere around 20-30. Many cultures did not even name their children until 3-4 years old due to the high death rate and infanticide was common if the child was weak or deformed. Once HG's agricultural societies emerged average height dropped from 5'11'' to around 5'2'' from a very diverse diet which included almost everything (even insects,gross right) to a large amount of grains which lacked the fortified b vitamins, iron, phytic acid of modern cereals (go look at your bread ingredients and look at all the added stuff).

One man one woman forever until the Disney movie ends?

The second assumption we have to deal with is monogamy. The anthropology of monogamy is a long disputed and emotionally charged discussion. From my understanding and biases aside (no I’m not a swinger or in an open relationship) monogamy was a result of the rise of agricultural societies, in order to maintain social hierarchy, order, and to accommodate sedentary life. Ask yourself, why all the religions of agricultural societies are so preoccupied with adultery, sexual control and sexual behavior? If monogamy is so natural why are “cheating” and dead bedrooms so common? Among hunter-gatherers sex between both sexes with multiple partners was quite common and served as one of the binding forces of the tribes. Survival of tribes required everyone to cooperate and intergroup conflict was so disadvantageous that it was not selected for. STD’s did not exist until the high population densities of agricultural societies. Reason being the disease did not have a high enough population to remain in the population till the death of the individuals. Many of the modern or traditional taboos about nudity or sex had not yet been invented either.

I am invited to the orgy?

How promiscuous exactly our ancestors were is not of great importance here. For our discussion removing the assumption of monogamy shows several of the survival advantages of promiscuity. Once monogamy is removed the preoccupation with paternity isn't an issue. Tribes of hunter gatherers were much more closely related than someone living across for the floor from you in your dorm. This made sense for the environment to be selecting genetics at the group level via inclusive fitness rather than at the individual level. Of course, too much inbreeding can be a problem for which there are several solutions. People can leave to surrounding tribes or simply be not be attracted to their brothers, sisters, and parents. The science of attraction even details how females prefer the scent of men with differing immune systems than those more similar. Humans also tended to be attracted to variety and novelty, which could be why young men find lingerie catalogs exciting at first but then find, in time, they can’t get an erection unless they watch monster cock gangbangs with bondage. Of course not all people go down that path but the draw to the new and exciting is very real.

Not my real dad!

Understanding the promiscuity and ambivalence towards paternity, communal raising of children starts to make sense, well, once they get past the trials of hunter gatherer childhood. This means that women did not have to depend on a single male for resources. This is a flinstonization feature where we project the ideal monogamous nuclear family back into a place it didn’t exist. Children and women both had the protection and resources of the entire tribe. In many more “primitive” cultures and different cultures around the world hoarding food or being selfish with resources is a cultural taboo. The point is it makes a ton more sense as a survival strategy to have the protection and resources of many of the tribes men rather than a single one. Due to the economies of scale in group hunting vs solo hunting it is not even clear a single man lacking modern technology could rally the resources to care for and protect a woman and child by himself. All a predator like a lion or leopard has to do is wait till the woman and child are alone in their little flintstone house in order to get an easy meal. Whereas, in reality, with a group of around 150 individuals, Dunbar’s number, it would be exponentially more difficult to isolate and kill anyone.

Bukkake Time!

Males did not need to be so obsessed with paternity as they had to be in agricultural societies, because no one knew who that father was anyway and child was raised by the tribe as a whole. Some Anthropologist and Evolutionary Biologist studying sperm have come to the conclusion that the human reproductive anatomy is indicative of intense sperm competition. In essence, our sperm fought it out with each other so we didn’t have to. In fact the vagina is a battleground with a maze of biochemical defenses and offenses to deal with selecting for some sperm over others. On the other side some sperm cells are actually specialized to find and kill other men’s sperm while others make for the egg. Even the coronal ridge of the penis serves as an excellent tool for vacuuming other sperm out of the vagina. The anatomical evidence for our promiscuous past, enormous penis (relatively), considerable size testes, and biological adaptations make a solid case against monogamy. The vagina facing towards the front rather than the back is only shared by one other ape species, bonobos or pygmy chimpanzees. Bonobos are most promiscuous, with perhaps one exception, of the great apes and use sex as bonding behavior and to ease group tensions. Even the frequent bonobo encounters last only 10-30 seconds, compared to the 10 min or more copulation for humans.

The Takeaway TLDR?

Genetically, humans are still geared heavily towards hunter gatherer life, given that we spent the last million years in this state and the last 10,000 in agriculture. Women do have a biological screening process via attraction to select for healthy and sexy males. Genetic deformities and general lack of health were much more serious back in the days of hunter gatherers. After all TRP keeps telling us all we need to work out more and give a shit about our SMV anyway. The fine distinction from all this information should tell you it is much more likely the status seeking and wealth oriented focus that modern women display is a result of cultural conditioning. I mean seriously, how many times have you met that girl who is desperately trying to recreate her favorite childhood Disney movie? While this narrative rooted in science and anthropology may be a bit different, it doesn’t make TRP knowledge any less effective. We live in an agricultural society and have to deal with all these social constructs that go with it, and TRP can help us navigate it. This different theory can even help us understand what women desire at a biological level, mentally and physically healthy attractive men. Think about it, jealousy a result of the social construct of monogamy, is very unattractive to women on an innate level. That is unless she has been watching too many romantic comedies where the men are fighting over the pussy pedestal.

Closing thoughts

Next time you look at a woman, you don’t need to see her as this evil wealth sucking machine. In fact with enough time and space you can deprogram those cultural constructs that create these truly mindless awful divorce raping-women. However, as far as LTR Long term relationships go, monogamy is fucking hard and maintaining novelty in your relationships even more difficult. Dealing with this is something I don’t believe any amount of science or anthropology can manage. Perhaps you should turn to more traditional values that worked in agricultural societies over thousands of years. Good luck!

*This writeup got you interested in more reading? Links Below *

(posting these doesn’t mean I agree or you should agree with everything they say ect, there is always something interesting to learn wether you agree or not)

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -Aristotle

http://evolutionmedicine.com/2009/09/07/gene-environment-mismatch/ http://www.amazon.com/Sperm-Wars-Infidelity-Conflict-Bedroom/dp/1560258489 http://www.amazon.com/Sex-Dawn-Stray-Modern-Relationships/dp/0061707813 http://www.marksdailyapple.com/ http://www.amazon.com/Guns-Germs-Steel-Fates-Societies/dp/0393317552

EDIT: Shouldn't have used the word BroScience as it is politically loaded language.