In the modern world, what is the fate of female identity?

RockinSocksII · 2017-11-03T19:53:50+00:00

Women have a lot of idle time when they're not producing children, so they have to figure out what to do in the mean time. They can't pursue the harsh work of men without either harming their own weak constitution or petitioning to have the work softened to the point that it disables the society's ability to effectively deal with threats.

Yes because pursuing interests or a career is completely out of the question. Lol at the harsh work of men. Oh no, software development. Whatever will I do with my weak constitution?

EsauTheRed · 2017-11-03T19:42:29+00:00

Why do people talk of evolution as if it were some kind of god that designed the people of today?

tempuserthrowaway5 · 2017-11-03T20:10:25+00:00

"Women have a lot of idle time when they're not producing children, so they have to figure out what to do in the mean time. They can't pursue the harsh work of men without either harming their own weak constitution..."

^{^{^}}

Does it ever seem ironic to be typing during 2017, on a computer I presume was made after the year 2000 about a world view that hasn't been in place since about 1910?

goatismycopilot · 2017-11-03T20:58:29+00:00

So many weirdos this week. I now some theories have been put forth, I know I discussed with somebody else the possibility there was a school break going on somewhere, I have wondered if when TRP gets boring the randoms appear.

SmurfESmurferson · 2017-11-03T19:37:34+00:00

In a parallel way, men are faced with a dilemma concerning women. Men feel intensely attracted to them, but a variety of economic and social pressures mean that the end game of their attraction, reproduction, is placed under severe restrictions. Despite what their penis tells them, women have a lot less utility in the modern world than in the past Men can try to moderate their pursuit of women, but as can be seen, they find it easier to substitute women with pornography.

I don't know who you're hanging out with, but I don't know a single guy who is happier with porn than real women.

Porn just lets guys supplement their IRL partners, and live out a harem fantasy while remaining monogamous. It's never going to replace women.

goatismycopilot · 2017-11-03T19:51:37+00:00

I want to know more about all this idle time. Do you mean when I am not working?

IckyStickyPoo · 2017-11-03T20:25:13+00:00

Your OP sounded halfway sensible until the last third.

The vast majority of women have very little idle time, so the question is silly.

Evolution doesn't 'catch up'.

A percentage of women do the 'harsh work of men', though it's true that men are stronger, taller etc and a far larger percentage of men are suited for this kind of work than women. But this kind of work is increasingly being phased out and replaced by automation - in the future almost all of it will be.

jigglejalopy · 2017-11-03T20:34:05+00:00

What idle time are you talking about?

Women work full time and do more of the domestic and child rearing duties than men.

Just because you have loads of free time doesn't mean everyone else does

wtknight · 2017-11-03T19:50:24+00:00

Women have a lot of idle time when they're not producing children, so they have to figure out what to do in the mean time. They can't pursue the harsh work of men without either harming their own weak constitution or petitioning to have the work softened to the point that it disables the society's ability to effectively deal with threats.

There is plenty of non-harsh health care, education and service sector work that women are doing. It's traditional men's work that is declining due to mechanization and the outsourcing of labor to countries where labor costs are cheaper.

haikufun · 2017-11-03T21:19:00+00:00

Out of the two, most can agree that women are the more beautiful sex. Why is this?

I'm a straight female and I find men to be more beautiful than women...because I'm attracted to men.

storffish · 2017-11-03T19:37:40+00:00

I think you have it backward... men have less utility now than they did. women don't need men to have or raise kids anymore, theres plenty of community support. and there's less of a need for what we bring to the table (namely physical strength) as things become automated. this is a woman's economy. women will keep having kids and men will keep getting cut out of the process, save conception.

abaxeron · 2017-11-04T17:21:34+00:00

The comment section in and of itself reads like a bingo game "Spot a First Worlder". "Muh Automation"; "Muh Work Is Not Physical Anymore"; "Muh 1950s Stereotypes"...

Anyone with enough brain to Google stats on wealth redistribution and household expenses can see that women's "strength" and "independence" is supported by two pillars: the government and women's natural lesser need for food intake.

Electra_Cute · 2017-11-03T19:39:35+00:00

Failing at masculinity is feminine, the feminine identity is fairly simple to obtain because of this, it has always been more flexible and easy to obtain in most cases, so it is fine.

AutoModerator · 2017-11-03T19:32:40+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" 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.

wekacuck · 2017-11-03T19:43:47+00:00

Well, appeals to biology are dangerous.

So when someone starts off the bat talking about a natural law that females are obviously attractive because she creates the offspring and males are disposable and... therefore males are unattractive... I will just sort of stop and wonder in the back of my head what you think about other alternative biological tall tales that can be woven. Such as... peacocks. The male is basically a deliberately fragile and ornate thing designed to be attractive to mates... and predators... And his sole purpose is stay pretty and not to get damaged. He's pretty because he's disposable.

But mostly I wonder why one sex would be unattractive and why they wouldn't be mutually attractive.

Sorry. Got side tracked.

KerPop42 · 2017-11-03T19:57:43+00:00

At least in response to carrying capacity, evolution seems to have a few steps for avoiding overpopulation.

1) decreased desire for pregnancy; as we've seen in Europe, densely populated societies close to carrying capacity tend to have low, sustainable fertility rates, while pre-industrialized societies near carrying capacity have higher fertility rates but still only produce ~2.1 adults. Only during industrialization, when health and carrying capacity rapidly increase, do we see exponential growth. You can watch this video here: https://youtu.be/QsBT5EQt348

2) increased prevalence of LGBT people: while a gay couple doesn't produce children, it still produces resources that can help society as a whole. This is actually the main evolutionary theory for why homosexuality is still a part of humanity. Women with gay brothers tend to produce better offspring, statistically speaking.

3) expansion: less evidence to back this up, but when society is nearing its carrying capacity, there will be more and more pressure to leave society. Hence the rapid colonization of the New World by Europe. In the future, people who feel like they don't belong in society will be able to risk their lives and settle off-planet, spreading humankind to, for now, nearly inhospitable locations. Think of how bee hives, once they have enough resources, will make a new queen and bud off a new swarm.

a_mans_perspective · 2017-11-04T10:08:37+00:00

Evolution is a process that takes aeons. None of this is really relevant to my life, that of my kids, or even grandkids. By the time evolution reduces the male sex drive (and I'm not convinced that's inevitable... excess sugar may be bad for you, but excess women? Not so much, even in a world of overpopulation, given that you still want to be one of the few who DOES out-breed the others).

Ahem. By the time evolution reduces the male sex drive, the world will be unrecognizable from what it is today. Half the concepts you're talking about may not even matter anymore, or other ones may be at play. We may have been wiped out or domesticated by AI by then. It's hard to predict, or care, about what sexual relations will look five or ten or a hundred thousand years from now. I mean, hell, we're close to a sea change in which genetic modification becomes common, and the species essentially begins shaping evolution rather than the other way around.

Title	In the modern world, what is the fate of female identity?
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	1
Comments	187
Date	November 3, 2017 7:32 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/7alr0l/in_the_modern_world_what_is_the_fate_of_female/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/in-the-modern-world-what-is-the-fate-of-female.265031 https://theredarchive.com/post/265031

Comments