Why are women so much weaker than men? Compared to something like bears, human strength is vastly overrepresented in males.
Why are women so much weaker than men?
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
pregnancy consumes a lot of energy so it wouldn't make sense to devote a lot of energy to female physical fitness for, say, warfare when they would be useless for like 6 months. It's better to have women with slow metabolisms so they can weather poor conditions and maximize the chances of a successful pregnancy
Bears are also pregnant.
bears chose to get large and become apex predators through size to ensure survival, humans chose to become intelligent
...and 2x stronger men than women.
Modern women are weak as fuck because they're all terminally online on their phones and inactive. They're all anemic half starved zombies. Women just three generations ago were much stronger as the actually did physical activities around the homestead, like churning butter. There are many men today that wouldn't be able to churn butter
Men are also weaker today. The ratio actually has been favouring women more in modern times in strength. Stone Age Humans were more dimorphic. See the Gravettian men of Europe, who stood at 6 foot on average, while their women barely came up to 5'2.
What a nightmare
What's a nightmare?
Just put men in charge of reproduction completely
Like in the Bronze Age. Most males wouldn't breed and only the most successful would. I don't think this is what you want.
That’s putting it mildly. It was something like a 17:1 ratio of incels to breeders. Put males in charge of breeding and all that happens is the wealthy and powerful hoard females for themselves while incels fight and die in their profit wars and never question it because they’re too sexually frustrated to think straight
We have ancient DNA, the Y-DNA bottleneck obviously happened.
an MtDNA bottleneck also happened.
Everyone was more likely to reproduce in the past.
go back to where?
>mtDNA bottleneck also happened
it only happened once when farmoids overran hunter gatherers, most people through history have been peasant families scrabbling about on a plot of land
You posted the old study which clearly goes against what we know about ancient DNA.
nstead, our results suggest that R1a-M417(xZ645) was subject to a nonrandom increase in frequency, resulting in these males having 15.79% (4.12 to 44.42%) more surviving offspring per generation relative to males of other Y-haplogroups. We also find that this change in Y chromosome frequency is extreme compared to the changes in allele frequencies at fully covered autosomal 1240k sites (P < 0.0003) within the same males, suggesting a process that disproportionately affected Y-chromosomal compared to autosomal genetic diversity, ruling out a population bottleneck as the likely cause. Our results suggest that the Y-lineage diversity in early CW males was supplanted by a nonrandom process [selection, social structure, or influx of nonlocal R1a-M417(xZ645) lineages] that drove the collapse in Y-chromosomal diversity.
They aren't native. It's the same process. I1 could be native, but the Balkan I2 is of Slavic origin. It wasn't there before the Slavs.
I2 was native and was found in pre steppe farmer communities. I2 being WHG in origin obviously.
Still WHG in origin though. So native.
>everything I don’t like is Reddit
You have to go back
Nah. The incels also periodically follow some leader who promises them mad pussy and rebel against the wealthy elite.
I think that's why some societies promoted monogamy.
You have around 2 female ancestors for every 1 male ancestor not 17:1
Those are meme numbers.
It's based on modern samples and the bottleneck clearly happened later. There was a later study linking it to the expansion of patrilinear clans and calling it post-neolithic bottleneck.
You can even see it here how the Indo-European haplogroups absolutely dominated in Europe and South Asia.
...except The Balkans and scandinavia, where native haplos are competing.
Anons maybe I'm a brainlet but I just can't understand how one can have more female than male ancestors? Or how one can have any more of either sex. Why doesn't it have to be 1:1?
>Anons maybe I'm a brainlet but I just can't understand how one can have more female than male ancestors?
man fucking his daughters
That was calculated to have happened some 7000-5000 years BP, so it seems in whatever preceded the bronze age.
>put males in charge
>only some males breed, because all the males are in charge
That makes absolutely no sense.
>put females in charge of breeding
>100% of females breed with the top 20% of men
>guaranteed sex for females, not for men
This is the scenario you are thinking of. You're completely backwards.
How about just let men decide who breeds instead of broads.
Yeah that's what the "patriarchy" is. Enforced monogamy benefits males, not females.
In the scheme that previous poster complained about, they failed to realize that a horde of incels would band together and kill the chad-king. The numbers game favors them, the king can't fight 10 weaker men at once.
Weaker people are naturally subservient.
Not all of them.
Just look at how your average simp community reacts when their favourite streamer gets a boyfriend. Some people show their subservience to the alpha by proclaiming how happy they are for them and how they will continue to support them, and you have a subset of people that will be furious about it - those are the ones that would stab the guy in his sleep.
Why the fuck are you calling prehistoric men incels? The average prehistoric manlet has more testosterone than your entire civilized male lineage combined.
I bet it had something to do with culture of men eating a lot of meat and women eating a lot of plants
Gravettian diet was mostly meat, men did eat more of it though. I do not think it was a dietary issue.
What % was meat vs plant? We’re they in ketosis?
Time out of mind, the bears had a Bear Council. They had to make a decision going forward as a species -- size or intelligence?
They took a vote, and chose size.
And that's how bears got big. Natural selection at work.
Unironically, environmental pressures would cause female bears to choose larger and larger partners to ensure that their offspring would also be large and have higher chances of survival
that's not how evolution works
they didn't chose shit nigga
>bears chose to get large and become apex predators through size to ensure survival, humans chose to become intelligent
Bear paws typed this post
Bad equivalent, are female bears stronger than male bears?
humans are turbo k-selected, a female brown bear is around 300 lbs and pregnant for 8 months, which includes a hibernation dormancy period, they have litters of cubs weighing 1lb each, there are big differences between bears and humans
Bears aren’t social creatures.
Women wouldn’t survive alon, that’s what men are for.
Women don't need a man, chuddie. They can get along without one just fine.
Why do you hate women?
They are weaker than me yet have more rights and are protected by our legal systems.
Yes but why do you hate women?
They are privileged yet make themselves appear oppressed to climb the ranks unfairly in society, at the cost of civilizational integrity.
So blame conservative men with their gender roles of females not leftists.
lmao. show me a leftist who advocates for things inconvenient for women
Did you reply to the wrong person? Hating women would be implying that they need a man to survive, because they are otherwise too weak.
>Did you reply to the wrong person?
Then you're just retarded. Try and explain what about my post even remotely implied I hate women. I will reiterate: women are strong and capable enough to survive without a man.
Men and women both need each other and men specifically love the fact that women are weaker than themselves
>Men and women both need each other
That's chud logic. Women have been doing just fine without men. They are not weaker than men.
Why do you hate women?
I don't really. I'm just tsundere.
I don't. You hate women for thinking they are weak.
An observation is not an indication of hatred. Do you think I hate my dog because I observe that he is stupider than me?
>discussion involving women
>you waste no time bringing up domesticated animals in comparison to make your argument
Typical. No wonder you're projecting so hard about hating women.
Men love women for being weaker. If you don't, you either hate women, or you're not a man. Which is it?
Yes anon, tell us more about how you compare women with animals.
I didn't compare them to animals.
We're all animals
>women should become men
but they are
i could kill my wife with one hand if i wanted to
sorry but studies show society crumbles if women gain too much power, hole.
female bears live solitarily and have to do everything themselves
Bears for the most part are solitary animals, so both males and females need to be able to fend for themselves without a pack to back them up.
Humans are social apes, so each sex is able to rely on the other to better specialize.
> average adult male twice as big as average adult female
What are you talking about?
OP thought that since mother bears are so aggresive that means they're as strong as males, somehow?
They should probably did such a study based on ancestry. European Caucasians are highly sexually dimorphic compared to for example Asians.
I doubt those numbers apply to all races.
>European Caucasians are highly sexually dimorphic
No they aren't, they're just more masculine. You should look at white women in Utah or Nazi Germany without any make-up.
Testosterone is a super drug. So much so that the Olympics committee is disqualifying women in 800m runs for having too much testosterone than women are allowed to have.
It's probably relevant to this, how humans don't got the gorilla retard-strength anymore
in favour of more precise muscle control, manipulating objects with our hands, etc
You know like, how a tiny chimp can rip your arm off. Cuz their muscles are simply structured differently
>You know like, how a tiny chimp can rip your arm off. Cuz their muscles are simply structured differently
That's Bullshit. Chimps can't even kill grandmas under 30 minutes. A human male could one-shot an elderly person. Chimps are technically AS strong as humans but they are retarded and can't apply ir well. Their best weapons are their teeth.
No, he's actually partially correct. They aren't structured differently, but they do have a much higher muscle density than a human. Their grip strength is also far in excess of humans. The trade off is that chimps lack fine motor skills (they have the motor control of a toddler) and while their muscles are denser they have less total mass. So a human power lifter could lift more raw weight, but a chimp can apply more grip and force in a specific motion.
a more interesting question is:
why do some nations have less attractive women than others? given the fact that the europioid is universally considered more attractive, why hasnt it been selected as the standard for all ethnicities?
is it negative eugenics through arranged marriages? whats the deal?
Less ideal climates for selection
women are attracted to big strong men, with males being literal pedophiles.
Bears aren't pack animals so women actually have to hunt for themselves.
In humans, men can be expected to pull women's weight in exchange for reproduction
Because God didn't design man and woman to be equals.
Even if women are inferior they should strive to overcome their inherent inferiority.
you just cant do that, liberalnagger
Women are inferior, which is why they need men for support. To admit this is to love women. To deny women being inferior is to hate them. israelites have brainwashed you into thinking otherwise, and hating women.
I hate women, I think it's morally corrupt to have an entire class of literal subhumans slaves.
Why should they? If I'm bad at math why should I strive to be equal to a math genius instead of doing something I'm good at?
Not being as physically strong doesn't mean inferior, man and woman have different roles and God designed it this way. God created Eve as an help meet for Adam.
Rejecting these roles is detrimental, e.g. female cops typically can't overpower a male suspect/perp and can't detain them on their own (or sometimes even with another female cop partner still can't do it), and female firefighters can't carry as much dead weight out of a burning building (and standards have even been lowered to allow more women into physically demanding careers like these). In these two examples, lives are put in danger by the physical weaknesses of women, and in many cases it is their own lives being put in danger by being lied to and misled that they "can do it too" when in reality they simply cannot.
In pic related, we see women aren't really fit for combat either. It's not sexism to state facts like this, it's just politically and socially inconvenient, but still true. Women typically make better teachers and nurturers and other similar careers or roles, hence why God designed woman to get pregnant and not man. And for most of history, women didn't /have to/ get careers to support themselves, they were supported by their father until given in marriage to a man who would then take care of them. Women in careers are also never as happy as a mother who can spend more time with her children and raise them. It's not like slaving away for some employer is more fulfilling or enjoyable than staying at home and playing with your kids most of the time anyway.
Genetic entropy, 2nd law of thermodynamics, laws of information, law of biogenesis, laws of conservation of matter/energy all disprove materialism and materialistic beliefs. The universe had a Creator, life had a Creator, and man had a Creator. Further, the world is littered with real world evidence supporting the history recorded in the Bible. You should actually research that instead of professing yourself wise.
>all disprove materialism and materialistic beliefs
In what way?
These are apologetics arguments they are prime retardation. Basically admit they can't prove God so they resort to pseudo science bullshit. If you want to burst a blood vessel look up frank turek.
Men are the best teachers women are dumb animals and your a simp who should commit suicide
women aren't "inferior" to men, they are specialized differently
touch grass, you make everyone saying there are physical differences in gender look like a retarded virgin crybaby
If you need laws to keep up with a other group of society you are inferior, no shame in that. Children are inferior to adults, that's why we have laws to protect them. Women are not inferior to men, why didn't the just launch gender equivalent of slave revolts against their male oppressors in a majority of history, instead they took humiliations most slaves wouldn't stand for.
absolute brainlet take lmao
the guy who wins a race isn't a superior human to the guy who lost, he's a superior runner
guy who lost the race might be able to beat the winner at shotput
inb4 "women are weaker at all sports" it's an analogy
Superior doesn't mean better at everything but just better overall. Men aren't superior to women because of one thing but many things. Women can do some things (albeit very few) brtter than men.
Inferior in what way? You know difference in strength doesn't mean they should giving less rights.
Free your mind
Worth noting that women have stronger immune systems (which also results in more autoimmune disorders, particularly since the 20th century because pregnancy mitigates overactive immune systems) and also have lower infant mortality.
This is one of the reasons why you have more female ancestors/females had more reproductive success; more females actually reached reproductive age. It's not just muh incels.
>Men can easily overpower women physically
>women are allowed to run around and make life into a living hell for everyone
>”m*n” prevent other Men from preventing it
How do we deal with the soi problem?
Become a stronger and smarter man
Because men hunt and fight for resources.
Same reason why male lions are bigger than female.
Because most male lions hunt alone, so they evolved to be bigger.
Another theory i've heard is because men can't rape females that are stronger than them or equal, so the only women that managed to reproduce all the time were the weaker ones.
Male lions do not hunt
Most male lions live alone or in small family groups of brothers and cousins, and yes they do hunt because otherwise they would be dead. Even male lions in prides occasionally hunt, it's more of an issue of spending most of their time patrolling pride territory because those solitary males are constantly testing them to try to replace the resident male once he is too old or injured to fight them off.
Random mutations there is no actual reason why women are weaker
Physical strength isn't important anymore, like at all.
its an inherit difference
It is, for manual labor. And also warfare, land troops are still not outdated and the have to carry and endure a lot of shit.
t. Brooklyn soi journo
Why are you comparing humans to bears, instead of our closer relatives? All great ape males are much bigger and stronger than females. Humans are no exception, in fact our gender difference is not nearly so pronounced as theirs.
Because we are primates, not bears.
>Beaten by a cripple
Do women really?
The dimorphism is beyond the physical, google top 100 chess players and start checking them by gender.
The big reason, more than anything else, has to do with male on male competition. In pretty much every species in which males are physically stronger than females, the males compete to a big degree to monopolize females for their own reproduction. This is what human sexual dimorphism is about. Our ancestors were highly competitive about access to their females, though kind of like chimpanzees one group of males would often work to defeat another group of males and take their females. This is different from what you see with gorilla or orangutans, where the males do not cooperate. That is why orangutans and gorilla males are large relative to their females, while the sexual dimorphism with chimpanzees and humans is less crazy.
>The big reason, more than anything else, has to do with male on male competition.
evolution goes to extreme lengths to keep the gender dimorphism going, to keep females weaker. how can this have anything to do with whether males compete? it would be easier for evolutionary innovations allowing a male to be more successful in aforesaid competition to be applied to both genders; why bother with separation mechanisms? some instances can perhaps be explained away by the fact that there are already a lot of places in the genome which only a male has, and these could easily host the genetic differences, but gene expression is a convoluted mess and relies upon a large part of the genome, most of it common between male and female.
at some point the ability to rape females was an evolutionary advantage for both the male and the female. actually I would not be surprised if in most animals copulation would feel like rape for the female - cats excepted, their females are whores.
well it all has to do with our evolutionary roles. Simply put, men evolved for hunting and competition with other men. So a healthy man would have more muscle than a healthy woman. On the flip-side, since women evolved for gathering and birthing, women typically have better color receptors in their eyes and have a higher pain tolerance.
I wish i was born a women this world is pure hot garbage
I like sticking auberinges up my ass, I figure it would be neat to have a vagoo to stick it in too