A theory I have seen batted about repeatedly amongst Red Pillers is the 20/80 ratio that most women want the top tier of men in the 20% and won't settle for the bottom 80% especially not now in the day of tinder. There's this notion that women are following their natural instinct (whether they acknowledge it or not) to breed with the alpha male to ensure they get genetic superiority for their offspring whether they actually want offspring or not (we're not dealing with rationality here).

This idea seems to be pushed forward by your PUA and alpha (and alpha wannabe) types who feel they posses those superior sought-after genes. At the same time they are shaming the beta nerds who they feel aren't suppose to breed and pass on their weaker genes. They are reinforcing that image of the girls who find the kind of guys that shove nerds into lockers more attractive than the future Bill Gates and Elon Muskes destined to propel society forward.

The problem with this idea and women's natural instinct is that it's far from the truth. It'd be great if they actually were going after the top 20% of males (the intellectuals, creators, and innovators) but often their idea of top quality is rather askew as they put emphasis on superficial qualities which is why bullshitting PUAs have success with them. They want the rich guy but they want the Chad guy as well and not very often are the two combined unless the Chad guy inherited money. Sometimes they'll get with the beta provider but have the alpha loser guy's kids because those mating instincts have them mistaking peacock confidence with genetic superiority.

Back in the Stone Age sure breeding with a strong male made sense when you had to fight off cave bears and the common cold but even then it was intelligence not brute strength that helped humanity survive and thrive.

A number of women especially in these Tinder days still seem to follow their primitive nature of looking for the strong mate whether it be an athlete, rock star, or a cocky drug addict ex-con. Their instincts are often just bad for them (from all their tales of abusive relationships) and society in general. Today in our complex society we need fewer cavemen and more beta nerds like scientists, engineers, administrators, visionaries, teachers, and thinkers.

But our society has become more like women's natural instincts of attraction. We place more value on celebrities, athletes, fame and beauty - basically superficiality rather than in intelligence, organization, skills, actual talent, etc... We are fortunate that we haven't completely abandoned the intellectual arts but how much more would we be advanced if not bogged down in our superficial societal need of seeking validation?

And women's empowerment apparently isn't going to propel us forward as more of them given the freedom to choose have either gone into gender studies or gotten dizzy on the cock carousel hence why we have more non-western women in engineering than western ones (and those we do have by the sounds of it many aren't terribly good).

If the beta nerds do perfect the sex robot and the artificial womb I think it will and should be the intellectual qualities selected for future offspring rather than the violently-prone alpha male ones. The future may be a bright one of progress and of fewer nerds shoved into high school lockers.