We are going back to our uncivilized days in dating and it isn't great for society

Equivalent_Dance2278 · 2025-10-10T06:35:01+00:00

I’m constantly baffled by how misled you are about what we know about cavemen dating. We do not know. We can hypothesise, but there is no written record and it’s most likely there were monogamous and polygamous groups. Harems and bullshit like that are just made up fantasies you have.

waffleznstuff30 · 2025-10-10T12:21:49+00:00

So you are a conservative? It says in your flair. So you must feel a certain way about DEI.

What you are implying is essentially DEI for men. That women regardless of their wants and needs. Should take on a man they don't want so that way he has someone. Because it's "fair" and for the betterment of society or we are reverting back to caveman days.

Lift_and_Lurk · 2025-10-10T12:09:15+00:00

This modern statistic (that’s shows that things are down since last report) shows young men still pulling at about 75 percent.

https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-sex-recession-the-share-of-americans-having-regular-sex-keeps-dropping

So that’s one modern study with hard data vs the nothing presented in the OP

Just another “society” rant which proves this meme

<image>

Velocirappthor · 2025-10-10T06:25:41+00:00

Honestly this is stupid i don't even know what to comment.

You say about caveman and then about harems.....harems were in some cultures way after cavemen. Your whole post is just some paranoia and forcing women to be something they are not based on....nothing.

SexCrispies · 2025-10-10T07:44:58+00:00

You should spend more time reading science on what actually happens in mating/dating, instead of basing your views on constructs you build from the ramblings of frustrated teenagers who are biased as fuck. Or from "fresh and fit" type videos with ideologically blind people pushing narratives that fit their views based on misunderstanding or willfully misusing data/science.

There were a few top males with large harems and all the lower status men died without reproducing

No. https://nuancepill.substack.com/p/was-polygyny-widespread-in-history

You want to be red pilled? Stick to the truth and keep the ideology out of your views.

Also pls dont use old statistic which shows 70% of men are paired , try to go for recent data which talks about genz

Most recent data from the general social survey of the US: genz women are more single than gen z men.
Trendlines show there is a slight increase in singleness over the past 12 years for both sexes.

If you compare men and women with the preferred age gap, you see equal levels of being single. Men aged 18-21 are driving the 10% gap in the trendlines. Why? Probably because very young men prefer to not be committed to a woman slightly more than women. Probably because very young men prefer same age women, while women on average, prefer slightly older guys. There really is no problem regarding "harems". The data we have on cohabitation clearly shows, that there are no widespread harems that would affect any pairing gaps. People overwhelmingly live together with their partners. Both men and women.

Again, please build your views on actual data and not on what you want to believe

<image>

autistic_cool_kid · 2025-10-10T06:58:16+00:00

There were a few top males with large harems,

Bro that's not cavemen, that's what happened when agriculture was invented

It collapsed in 99% of human societies for a reason.

Matriarchal societies did not collapse, they did not develop except in fringe cases (where they still exist today), this isn't the same thing

Are people more disconnected and alienated today than 50 years ago? Sure. Modern living in the 21st century has its own challenges. Is the situation like what you're describing? No, you are inventing a whole ass scenario in your head. The whole "80% of women go for the 5% top men" is BS. It's not supported by data.

Women are more picky than men? Sure. Maybe then men should be more picky as well.

Stop thinking it's about genetics, that is also pure BS. Sure most women prefer tall guys, some people have advantages, but that's a far cry from the doomsday scenario you're inventing.

Ego73 · 2025-10-10T07:15:19+00:00

Hunter gatherer populations show a great diversity of Y chromosomes. Once you look at haplogroup chronology, it becomes quite apparent that the biggest paternal bottlenecks happen among settled (or pastoralist) societies. Agriculture and herding have been the main drivers of hypergamy.

So no, genetic evidence shows no mark of chads having big harems, and neither do anthropological studies of existing hunter gatherer populations.

alphamaker420 · 2025-10-10T10:44:10+00:00

You can call any behavior you don't like "uncivilized caveman behavior" but that doesn't make it true. It's not uncivilized or primitive for women to date men they want to date and dating people youre unattracted to isn't somehow the more evolved choice just because it's what you (not you specifically) want. If anything, considering forcing other people to bend to your will as an option is primitive caveman behavior.

Also it's not in good faith to ask people to ignore recent data if we're talking about recent trends and statistics. 70% of all adults are partnered and the bulk of single people are those under 30. People are marrying at older ages and tend to partner up with those of a similar socioeconomic status, meaning average women with average men and so on. Yes, 60% of young men are single but the data shows that that percentage drops off significantly for 30+ year olds.

EugeneCezanne · 2025-10-10T17:30:46+00:00

something happened that made 99% of human cultures realize that this wasn't productive, and that women should be forced to be monogamous (marriage)

There's a theory I read about recently that suggests the reason monogamy prevailed comes down to the societal buy-in of average men. That is, men who had no realistic hope of having a wife and children had less motivation to behave as productive citizens. Polygamous societies were thus at a long-term competitive disadvantage.

This wasn't some manosphere podcast either: it's actually a well-considered topic in ancient and pre-history.

However, this raises some pertinent questions. For one, is it the only sufficient way to manufacture male buy-in? For another, is it still necessary in modern society, particularly as economic systems, state security and social mobility have all radically changed.

It collapsed in 99% of human societies for a reason.

The counterargument is "maybe not." This is the problem with teleological arguments: it's often difficult to determine whether a perceived order (or function) is itself part of a cause or only an effect. For example, many historians believe that the reason monogamy prevailed in history is simply because the monogamists were more militaristic. There could be 100 reasons why--but once society A conquers or absorbs society B, it's too late to ask.

anewleaf1234 · 2025-10-10T06:10:20+00:00

So you want to force something on women. Or at least you talk about it.

Yet, you never ask men to make any changes? Not a mention.

Is there a reason for that?

Why are you giving men a pass?

ResponsibilityAny217 · 2025-10-10T14:37:57+00:00

Most of what u said is likely false or unfounded or delusional.

But even after that, the question is 'y ?'

I do agree that that the majority of the time the majority of the world was developed or helped to be developed through enforced monogamy.

(The majority of people getting married not by choice but by design the purpose of this was so that they would have a workforce and paternity certainty for provision, protection and inheritance purposes)

But now that civilization in the world has been developed nearly to the point of self automation with machinery, AI and technological, advances these measures are counterproductive and increasingly obsolete. - Why would we continue with that system. At this point that system is counter productive?

The cons of this system is that there are way more poor, ugly people, undesirable people than would be natural.

And now they're not even useful for work because they can be replaced by AI and machines.

The majority of people don't need to marry or produce it does nothing for society.

Edit : A system of enforced monogamy makes some sense under a society based on agriculture without tools, machinery etc (bc large labor force needed) to but not one based on machinery and automation. We'll just end up with a lot of people and no jobs for them which increases poverty, and poverty increases a bunch of societal problems.

No_Airport4390 · 2025-10-10T06:21:49+00:00

Women would only marry the average men if they needed him for support. Now they don't need it, they work and have the State.

wtknight · 2025-10-10T11:08:09+00:00

It might be better for the species though for women to have more agency selecting (although I don’t think that they are selecting to be in harems), which ultimately will be better for society as more bad genes will be weeded out from the gene pool. It will also make the men who do have good genes try harder in society in order to be selected.

Outside_Memory5703 · 2025-10-10T16:31:54+00:00

All anthropological evidence points to humans being only mildly polygamous, particularly in the small hunter gather societies that are thought to be the predominant structures in human history

Most of the lack of male reproductive success can be attributed to deaths from wars/conflicts, not being lifelong bachelors

It’s very clear why we have abandoned oppression — its expensive and inefficient

There has never been a large matriarchal society, and the number of recorded matriarchies can probably be counted on one hand

TermAggravating8043 · 2025-10-10T07:51:35+00:00

You neither argue this is natural selection, men and woman are both equal together and only the best are being selected for reproduction

Pathosgrim · 2025-10-10T11:16:39+00:00

Society promotes anti-family and people are too absorbed in their individualism. Technology is evolving, thus making some things easier for others, while rendering whatever obsolete. I can go on and on. No one's rights should be taken away, its best for nature to run its course.

BobtheArcher2018 · 2025-10-10T12:51:42+00:00

People have been projecting their own beliefs about human nature onto prehistoric mating for a long time. There is a lot we do not know. Some of the evidence we do have suggests a surprising amount of variation.

Polygamy was never that intense because it is hard to generate enough resources to support multiple families. Moreover, without more advanced social technology, it's going to be really hard to have many unpaired young males with no prospects in your tribe--sleeping in your caves and huts with you--while you monopolize multiple women.

Most evidence suggests that kin had a lot of influence on both male and female mate choice, though more on female. However, again, given limited technology, the preferences of the principals had to be considered--to the extent they even differed that much from their kin. If a young woman really hated her mate, she could run away, kill herself, kill him in his sleep, etc. Plus, even 50k years ago, parents loved their children. Principals had influence. Varying reproductive success rates for males and females at different periods do not seem to primarily be the result of female sexual selectivity, but rather death patterns for males in violence and women in childbirth. It would likely be vanishingly rare for any healthy, contributing adult male in a tribe to go unpaired or with no prospects. Something opens up. Another male dies. They raid another tribe and kill the men. Etc. How much raiding for women there was is unknown. It definitely increased greatly following the development of agriculture. Obviously, when you raid for women, there is going to be less female choice. But one needs to be really careful of projecting modern psychology backwards like this. Everything would have seemed different. Even genetically, we are not the same. It is true that most of our genetics are still calibrated to the stone age, but evolution didn't stop then--it accelerated. This seems particularly true of some cognitive traits for some groups, which could certainly have a huge impact on psychology.

I think it is obvious that modern mating is all fucked up in many ways. Whether this is a death spiral we have to find a way to pull out of, or just an inevitable transition period we will naturally push through, is hard to say.

toasterchild · 2025-10-10T09:31:05+00:00

This is the same propaganda they feed to young men to get them to join ISIS.

Cultural-Ad-8486 · 2025-10-10T09:49:59+00:00

I do agree that modern dating is often piece of shit.

But don't drag history into this, especially not the Neolithic period and earlier.

There's NO evidence of alpha males, but there is evidence of serial monogamy.

Those bullshit studies that claim "only a minority of men reproduced" don't take into account infant mortality, the overall male mortality rate (which is higher than that of women), migration, interbreeding (with Neanderthals in Europe, for example), or the fact that women were more likely to "migrate" in search of a partner and to move to another tribe (which allowed them to survive when their home tribe was destroyed by something).

And the most important thing doesn't fit here. Even if there were some mythically powerful "alpha male," there would be nothing stopping ordinary men from simply killing him collectively and then "normally dividing" all the women equally.

After all, the very fact that the largest cultures are now predominantly monogamous tells us that polygamy and "alpha males" are bullshit.

AutoModerator · 2025-10-10T06:07:10+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

AutoModerator · 2025-10-10T06:07:11+00:00

Hi OP,

You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. PPD has guidelines for what that involves.

OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.

An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:

Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;

Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;

Focusing only on the weaker arguments;

Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.

Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

CSISAgitprop · 2025-10-10T12:59:08+00:00

I find it hard to believe that the vast majority of men were simply barred from sex and relationships by a small group of "chads" in early human society. Wouldn't this group of men easily have a monopoly of violence to simply group up, kill that "chad" and pair up with women?

AreOut · 2025-10-10T07:23:41+00:00

it's funny how they call themselves "progressive" while at the same time advocating for going back thousands of years

TophetLoader · 2025-10-10T08:00:18+00:00

We are being replaced by Islam, simply by the difference between who wants children and who doesn't. Just saying.

LawfulnessSuper5091 · 2025-10-10T06:43:39+00:00

"None of us want Ignog, she's already got a cavebaby and she's curvy" - things never heard back in the tribes either.

Frootloops696 · 2026-01-21T15:21:37+00:00

Yeah tbh as a woman..unless i am down to my last penny, im not gonna date or even sleep w average males. I have to be in the brink of homelessness to even consider it tbh. No benefit in being a wife. Just sux 🤷‍♀️

lightshiner145 · 2025-10-10T06:36:40+00:00

When women are allowed to choose who they want, society goes to 💩. There's historical evidence of this. We wouldn't have all the technology and abilities to advance if women mated like animals. Most "beta" males are actually responsible for the evolution of civilization. Without the possibility of getting a mate, they'd just drop out of society more and more and it collapses. Every elite civilization eventually does and I'm sure this is a big reason for it.

lightshiner145 · 2025-10-10T06:33:06+00:00

Last paragraph is true. The ⚫️ community is an artificial matriarchy and it's filled with single mothers that choose mates based on how an animal/ cave woman would choose 1. That must change (and will)

DapperDan1929 · 2025-10-12T04:34:10+00:00

First declining birth rates. Now caveman dating! Lmao 😂

Title	We are going back to our uncivilized days in dating and it isn't great for society
Author	poorbatman243
Upvotes	0
Comments	314
Date	October 10, 2025 6:07 AM UTC (10 months ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1o2t4ft/we_are_going_back_to_our_uncivilized_days_in/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/we-are-going-back-to-our-uncivilized-days-in.1563797 https://theredarchive.com/post/1563797

Comments