How Many Women?

Imperator_Red · 2018-10-01T19:17:02+00:00

Whisper: This is a bit long but hoping you'll read and respond to this as I've tried to refute your arguments without resorting to any personal attacks that the others have employed.

TLDR: There is a lot of evidence that sexual monogamy was actually really important for civilization as it advanced into the agricultural phase from its hunter gather roots. This does not mean, however, that it is in any man's interest today to be sexually monogamous, as it only benefits the individual male if there are legal and cultural frameworks in place to actually enforce it. Also, note that I'm neither a practicing Christian nor a TRADCON.

Main Response:

This is something sounds like it makes sense, but it really could not be further from the truth. Monogamy can best be described as a sort of advancement that makes a civilization more powerful, similar to the progression from clans to tribes to kingdoms or republics, or the development of organized religion, or from living in mud huts to wooden houses.

Genetic studies show that at the dawn of agriculture, there was massive sexual inequality, with something like 1 in 17 men (probably the landowners) reproducing, down from about 40% of men before that.

https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success

Such a society would have been incredibly unstable. The 16 out of 17 males that did not reproduce would have had absolutely no stake in the society, and we can imagine that the rulers were probably constantly being overthrown and replaced.

Enter monogamy (reinforced by religion). Any society that adopted this practice would have become incredibly powerful. It would have gained much needed stability and the men in it would have been more motivated to defend it. It would only have to spring up once or a few times anywhere in the world for it to easily spread and come to dominate most agricultural societies, either through conquest or through the "adopt my neighbor's obviously superior practice" method. Now that great mass of males were getting some pussy, the leader could turn them outwards and direct their aggression against neighbors in order to take their land.

I think the one piece of evidence that you do have is the gender imbalance. While it's true that less advanced societies probably had much higher male mortality rates which would have led to an excess of females over males, I think that this is more true of hunter-gatherer type societies, where despite the lower absolute number of casualties from warfare, losing a few men from your clan or tribe could really take a bite out of the sex ratio. Agricultural societies had more absolute death from warfare only because the population was higher, but the actual % of men killed was simply not high enough to create the imbalances you're talking about.

There would have been an excess of females over males in agricultural societies, but not as huge as you are suggesting. Some from very poor families that could not afford a dowry probably would have found work as prostitutes and females from defeated enemies would of course become slaves, and could be used sexually by their masters. I think in this sense we do see some limited polygyny, but only in the sense of the absolute lowest women in the society being used as slaves or prostitutes.

I think we can look no further than the Roman Republic for some evidence here. During it's expansionary phase (before the debauchery that may or may not have actually existed with the later Romans), this was a very sexually conservative society, at least for the women. Women were married off young and having sex with another man's wife would have been a capital offense. Culturally, they placed a huge value on virtuous and chaste women. Yet the early Romans were one of the most warlike people that ever lived. Their lives essentially revolved around war and agriculture. Their extreme sexual conservatism allowed them to direct their energy outward and to conquer the Mediterranean world.

I think this also torpedoes the absurd idea often bandied about that sexual conservatism is somehow an invention of Christianity. This is ridiculous. Sexual conservatism is an invention of AGRICULTURE. An agricultural society that has evolved beyond a clan/tribal organization where everyone knows everyone else cannot survive without it.

Now none of this is to say that we should be sexually conservative today. This whole thing only works with the social and legal framework in place to enforce it, which clearly no longer exists. So feel free to channel your inner hunter gatherer warlord and create that harem to your heart's content.

Acrimont · 2018-10-01T18:01:30+00:00

Linking to the website; I like it.

Learned a new word, too.

uebermacht · 2018-10-01T18:13:16+00:00

I would like to give you reddit gold for this gem of information, Whisper.
However reddit does not earn to be invested into anymore.

red_philosopher · 2018-10-01T20:16:03+00:00

I had some ideas covering this topic some time ago. I argued that men have a dual mating strategy as well, to appease each if the female mating strategies. Each has their pros and cons, and the best approach is to achieve both, much as women are wont to do.

Good wisdom. It looks like TRP.Red is underway.

Rian_Stone · 2018-10-01T18:14:56+00:00

deleted ^{^{^What}} ^{^{^is}} ^{^{^this?}}

thepanda37 · 2018-10-01T18:18:41+00:00

That's the type of poster that gets vanguarded now?

Tell me more about how peaceful were ancient rome and greece and, you know, any civilization that was built on the nuclear family and monogamy. Arabs conquered most of the ancient world pretty much as soon as Islam put restrictions on polygamy.

It's good to refer to history, but not in this atrocious manner.

VasiliyZaitzev · 2018-10-01T19:55:53+00:00

Polygyny also gives low status women access to high status men. At least young, hot low status women.

Have you considered tying kitten up? It will take "responsibility" away from her, and she and FunSize can explore the new power dynamic.

LiveAFTSOV · 2018-10-01T18:57:03+00:00

TRP.Red Wont let me commment on your post, it keeps saying, comment cannot be blank even tho I wrote this:

Our lives are a battle ground! Great fucking post whisper.

I got a question though, what do you think about steering women to revolve their entire lives around you, slowly, through tough love and domination? "Im growing, grow with me or my branches will break your ceiling!"

You know, showing her that other women are seeking what you as a man can offer, and giving her a chance to uplift / change herself to meet our personal standards?

I see it as virtuous & right, + I get to keep the bond/time I built with that individual if they make it through the changes & grow stronger -- would really like to consider your take on it.

People in such conditions need to find ways to act on the sexual realpolitik (or the relationship/hookup won't work at all) without being publicly shamed (which tends to happen to women whose men are less monogynous than the standard, or to men who are less polygynous than the standard).

Im currently living in a Polygynous relationship now, main girl with the freedom to meet up and fuck any girl I want (had damn near 20 last month, was a crazy vacation.)

I put myself on blast on my personal facebook all the time, talking about my polygynous life and how happy the women I share it with are -- the normies all seem to love my facebook musings.

Ill conclude with this thot : "You care for your women, so act like it. She isn't irreplaceable, so dont act like that. Give her the opportunity to be everything she can for you and if she cant, kick her to the curb!"

Zech4riah · 2018-10-01T19:34:43+00:00

Nice post when it comes to content but I actually have easier time reading clinical studies in the medical field than this post. I had to read many sentences 3-4 times to understand what you are saying.

I'm not a native speaker so you can take this feedback with a grain of salt.

Whisper · 2018-10-01T22:24:00+00:00

This is interesting. Could you point me towards what it is based on?

What is interesting now is that women can potentially out-resource us. So even beta bux should start to dwindle.

It's weird to think the majority of us will still end up monogamous, despite all the bashing it gets and the clear negatives of it.

arythmetic · 2018-10-03T08:39:12+00:00

Great pull toward trp-red at the end there. I'm gripped.

Title	How Many Women?
Author	Whisper
Upvotes	85
Comments	82
Date	October 1, 2018 5:53 PM UTC (7 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/9kimec/how_many_women/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/how-many-women.52781 https://theredarchive.com/post/52781

Comments

TRP.Red Wont let me commment on your post, it keeps saying, comment cannot be blank even tho I wrote this: