Maybe, but our intelligence could just as easily have developed through brutal survival selection as opposed to sexual selection. Men who weren't cunning and resourceful were considerably less likely to survive during traumatic food scarcity or in the face of predators.
Throughout history of modern humans, it was mostly parents choosing mates for their offspring, often for near-term political or economic reasons rather than health, ability or looks; so even though parental choice would count as sexual selection, it does not seem highly directional toward a particular phenotype. So mortality selection did the heavily lifting and still does.
Do you have particular evidence of parents being selective for intelligence (beyond more intelligent guys being more capable of accruing more resources and making a better case for their potential as provider). There is some evidence that looks never mattered much in parental choices. If intelligence were subject to sexual selection in this way, we'd see a strong preference in parents for high education levels in their children's mate choices and e.g. math geniuses acting as super stimulus, which does not seem to be the case very much.
Relationships as we know them with a long courtship period and female autonomy in mate selection were not a thing in our early evolutionary history. They would not have been relevant to the development of our intelligence.
The "blackpill", that is evidence/science based reasoning of human sexual relations applied to everyday life, has its origins entirely in the incel community. If you believe that evidence is applicable to human sexual behavior, you are definitionally an ideological incel.
[–]Red_Lancia_Stratos 19 points20 points21 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]bilberberbers4 points [recovered] (13 children) | Copy Link
Maybe, but our intelligence could just as easily have developed through brutal survival selection as opposed to sexual selection. Men who weren't cunning and resourceful were considerably less likely to survive during traumatic food scarcity or in the face of predators.
[–]Red_Lancia_Stratos 7 points8 points9 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]throwaway3649_ 6 points7 points8 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Red_Lancia_Stratos 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HotsLeaver 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]GigaSpergcel2 points [recovered] (7 children) | Copy Link
Throughout history of modern humans, it was mostly parents choosing mates for their offspring, often for near-term political or economic reasons rather than health, ability or looks; so even though parental choice would count as sexual selection, it does not seem highly directional toward a particular phenotype. So mortality selection did the heavily lifting and still does.
Intelligence possibly resulted more specifically from competition as suggested by the social brain hypothesis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_human_intelligence#Social_brain_hypothesis
[–]Red_Lancia_Stratos 2 points3 points4 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]GigaSpergcel1 points [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link
What's your point?
[–]Red_Lancia_Stratos 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]GigaSpergcel1 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
Do you have particular evidence of parents being selective for intelligence (beyond more intelligent guys being more capable of accruing more resources and making a better case for their potential as provider). There is some evidence that looks never mattered much in parental choices. If intelligence were subject to sexual selection in this way, we'd see a strong preference in parents for high education levels in their children's mate choices and e.g. math geniuses acting as super stimulus, which does not seem to be the case very much.
[–]Red_Lancia_Stratos 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]GigaSpergcel1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
The link between looks and IQ is very weak, around .1-.2. The link between school performance and IQ is .6.
[–]mr4ffe 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]barbodelli 24 points25 points26 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Carkudo 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bilberberbers1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
Relationships as we know them with a long courtship period and female autonomy in mate selection were not a thing in our early evolutionary history. They would not have been relevant to the development of our intelligence.
[–]barbodelli 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]returnofklip 30 points31 points32 points (19 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dustin_Bromain 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ladrm 15 points16 points17 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[–]Coffee-Cats-Glitter 14 points15 points16 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]returnofklip 14 points15 points16 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]ladrm 11 points12 points13 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]magnificent18 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]returnofklip 13 points14 points15 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[+]ladrm -9 points-8 points-7 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]ladrm -4 points-3 points-2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]returnofklip 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bilberberbers2 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
The "blackpill", that is evidence/science based reasoning of human sexual relations applied to everyday life, has its origins entirely in the incel community. If you believe that evidence is applicable to human sexual behavior, you are definitionally an ideological incel.
[–]ladrm 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]azevedro 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Poop666cunt 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Idontjudgelol 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]returnofklip 10 points11 points12 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Idontjudgelol 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DenEJuAvStenJu 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link