edit-- are you down voting this post because you think that I'm wrong, or because you don't like the point that I'm making?

there are so many posts on TheRedPill which begin with a recitation of the received wisdom of evolutionary biology and anthropology. For example, this post. What amazes me about these posts is how the OP just accepts the premise as true, without any critical evaluation. This is contrary to TheRedPill which posits that our behavior should be governed by logic and objective reality.

Let me give you an example of how the received wisdom might be wrong. Most of us were raised with the idea that Neanderthals were lumbering, stupid, hairy cave men who were beaten by the smarter, faster, more lithe homo sapiens. Now, research suggests that Neanderthals may have be smarter and more advanced than the homo sapiens of the time. The reason why neanderthals went extinct is because they were out-bred by the homo sapiens. So, the modern humans that exist today might not actually be the best hominids that our planet has produced. But we are the most survivable.

The truth of the matter is that we know very little about early hominids. We can't say for certain when human precursors became a human beings-- whether the transition began with biological or cultural adaptations. We don't know if early non-human hominids had culture, religion, mores, or taboos beyond the instincts that they inherited. (culture is that which is transmitted between generations, not inherited). We can speculate as to these things based on archeology, but the record is very thin.

We don't know if the transition from non-human to human occurred over hundreds or thousands of generations, or if it happened quickly over the course of a few generations in response to some incredible stimulus (like competition from competing non-human hominids).

We can't even decide how old the human species really is. New research suggest that human beings might be several millions of years old rather than the traditional view that humans are 1.3 million years old.

We don't even understand how evolution works. There are two competing views: 1) gradual phenotype changes occur over time (the giraffe's neck gets imperceptibly longer over generations); or 2) genetic mutations build up over time, and then when they reach a critical point, the phenotype changes very quickly over a few generations (the giraffe's genetic code gradually changed over millennia, but the long neck appeared very quickly over the course of a few hundred generations).

Furthermore, there is more genetic variation among humans today then at any other point in our history, probably because there are so many of us.

One of the interesting questions that we don't have an answer for is whether human beings have ever existed outside of human culture. This goes to the very basic question of "what is a human being?" What transformed the early hominids into "modern" humans? It was probably the interplay of biology and culture; meaning that culture is as essential to human evolution as is random genetic mutation. Early hominids/ human beings that had better culture, better biological structures (brain structures, mouths and tongues conducive for language, face bones and musculature conducing to expressing emotion, better hands for working with intricate tools, etc.) had a better chance of survival than other early hominids/ humans.

Thus, if theRedPill is going to continue to reference human evolutionary biology as a reason why women like alpha males, or bad boys, and why women like to sleep around, or why men like to be betas, etc. it really is nothing but theory and speculation. It's not fact. It's not empiricism. It definitely isn't a excuse for or an explanation of your own failures, emotions, motivations, etc. However, if somebody feels the need to preface their post about contemporary human behavior with a recitation of human evolutionary history, then you have to cite a source from an actual research study that supports your argument; otherwise you're just posting nonsense.

TLDR-- stop trying to explain contemporary sexual behavior by making up theories about human evolutionary history. We don't know enough about early hominids/ human beings to confirm whether your theories are true or false, and it is unlikely that "modern human beings" have ever existed outside of "human culture."