Will women always have easier lives than men?

Western civilization is oppressive. If women only want to sleep with Chads then why shouldn't they? Should they be forced to marry and mate with ugly guys who turn them off?

That has nothing to do with it.

This had to be unstable. Those 16 other dudes will at some point lob the head off of King Chad, no?

True. "Hypergamy" is an incel meme

yes, and claim queen stacy, until the next 16 guys come along and do the same

Yes

No, the worked, paid taxes and died.

they'll try, but their Chad neighbours will invade and kill-rape them too

theY*

>Will women always have easier lives than men?
yes

Either they were constantly raiding each other by using the virgins as soldiers who got promised a stacey if they got home or took one from an enemy or they simply beat the slave caste into submission and let them be homos instead.

Come on, we do have humour. It just tends to get lost in translation now and then because our language is so much more complex than yours.

Believe me it was not easier.
The rate of women dying during or after birth was very high. There was a saying that the battlefield of the woman was the childbed

Does this mean on average men were knocking up 17 women each?

Tits or gtfo

This is why being gay is natural for most men. Literally over 50% of men are bi or gay but they are closeted or repressed which is sad because it's completely natural.

>they were constantly raiding each other by using the virgins as soldiers
That's a good point. Young men have always been the first line of cannon-fodder. It's pretty logical that it would work that way, just follow the logic of here.

underrated

>complex
sophisticated would be a better word

For a while, no, because the chads were all agrarians who were taking in harems of hunter-gatherer women. Hunter-gatherer men were completely fucked. Eventually, everyone in an area would be farming, so the hierarchy would shift and the lowest status farmers would no longer get any women, which is when the chimp out would begin, and monogamy was probably instated as an agreement across the whole hierarchy; one woman each is infinitely better than 20 and the village collectively murdering you.

True dat. Humour can't be translated unless it's "stupid humour"

youtube.com/watch?v=wEN6hhLgssk

t. rapy bongfaggot

Feels like reddit in this thread

This is mostly just because male infant mortality in primitive societies is typically MUCH higher than female infant mortality. Infant males have much weaker immune systems that infant females.

Evolutionarily, this makes sense as you only need one male to rapidly impregnate a large number of females.

You would only know this if you frequent Reddit.

I guess that's why most if Europe is of the R1 Y-DNA then. Only way up north did I1 survive, and I2 in the mountains of Bosnia.
>one woman each is infinitely better than 20 and the village collectively murdering you.
What about Islamic societies then? Maybe that's why they are so regressive...

>Evolutionarily, this makes sense as you only need one male to rapidly impregnate a large number of females.

All well and good but one male can't provide food and protection for a large number of offspring.

Food for thought

monogamy developed because there is a point where continuous investment by the male into the family/offspring is more valuable than getting the best genes and possibly being left on your own accord.

>dying in childbirth meme

It was worse than now not but atrocious

Then why are there significantly more women than men in Africa today? It's a primitive agrarian society with high infant mortality.

Attached: 0 HHWlmC4NsiQlaldx.png (1512x731, 55K)

>Infant males have much weaker immune systems that infant females.
Source: Your ass.

*Then why are there NOT significantly

Only half correct. Its been proven that males don't have weaker immune systems; but viruses actually check to see whether their host is male or female via DNA. Females receive a softer attack which allows for the virus to survive longer and very possibly spread quicker. Males get the full brunt of the virus.
Source?
bigthink.com/laurie-vazquez/some-viruses-are-more-lethal-for-men-than-women-study-finds
dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4030982/Man-flu-DOES-exist-Viruses-want-kill-men-women-study-finds.html

Looking for official studies/scientific website sources now.

Objectively inferior would be even better, but that would violate the German one-word rule or "smashenitalltogethertendency" as you call it.

That IS why they're so aggressive.

Islamic nations are under infinite incel revolution thanks to their retarded mud religion and culture.

This poitnt has been made in the past.
When muhammeds Arabs spilled out of arabia they had a pretty good conquerer faith and sacked the sassanid and roman monogamists whose soldiers had to repent for killing with the force of a thousand blue balls who were promised to unload even if they died as killing is a most noble form of entering the heavenly pleasure garden.

5% mortality rate from pregnancy before modern medicine. This is why women are so picky.

Health was actually really bad in early Agrarian societies. Anyone who wasn't extremely resilient to diabetes and alcohol rapidly died off because everyone lived primarily on grain and alcohol.

so 1000 men + 1 woman = 0.004 babies

those 16 other dudes were all the sons of chad since he was the only one who reproduced, so they agreed to monogamy since all of them were as chad

You fags need to read "The Privileged Sex", a book written by a big historian who practically destroyed not just modern feminist bullshit but the entire idea that women had it harder than men at any point in human history

Of course he got a lot of shit for that book and wasn't invited to talk about it anywhere, unlike his other "less controversial" history books

>inb4 he's a jew

And? if someone was about to kill you and the only guy you have was made by a jew guy would you not use it? are we reaching these levels of stupidity?

Your family tree isn't even your real family tree. Statistically, some man got cucked somewhere down the line. Thanks to women you're not even who you think you are.

Monogomy has nothing with Christianity, and it was practised by all the Indo-European tribes. It’s the only marriage system that makes any sense because men need to cooperate with one another to hunt, and make war. The leader may get more of the spoils(concubine slaves) because of his leadership qualities, but he still needs to share with others in order to keep the rest of the tribe happy and working with him.

Yes.
Men are disposable, women aren't.

Meant to say "the only gun"

Thank you

That settles it men. We come from the stalk of warriors, farmers, builders and scientists. Selectively bred from millennia with only the strongest, fastest and determined surviving.
We have conquered the physical world and elevated all other life to a higher plane of existence.
We are breaking records every day, be they; physical, financial, mental, political, militaristic, speed running, chugging the dew. All great accomplishments are noted by fellow man a revered as such.

Surely you alone can measure up to the task of conquering a mere Stacey and her two kids by Tyrone, bottomless spending habits/vagina and inability to shut the fuck up and know her place and just be a pleasant human being for one fucking minute of one day.
Surely this is a trial worthy worthy of your sacrifice?

The hunter got his pick of the litter because he was the breadwinner, the other guys in the tribe got leftovers or table scraps

Exactly. Stuff like slapstick humour werks because it doesn't even need to be translated. But when it comes to puns or situational humour which you simply can't get because you're not a native speaker or didn't grow up in a certain cultural environment you're out of luck.

it's already assumed women get better lives (in general) than men do. every man knows this. just look at the modern Western woman. they literally have it all and still complain about not having "rights" or about free birth control, so they can slut around and have no consequences for their actions. every man already knows that women are spoiled rotten and have innate privileges men don't. (which, as you said, is rarely talked about)

Men are basically slaves to women. 99% of male achievement is based on getting laid or better access to females. We basically serve women.

>What about Islamic societies then?
Low IQ. Same reason why groid tribes in Africa have polygamy. Human is much harder to subjugate than subhuman, and he will come up in much more effective ways to kill you if he wants, even if he's weak - he'll ambush you, or cooperate with others, or find something else. Lower races arent capable of that, notice that monogamous tradition exists only among most advanced ones.

I like van Creveld. Sometimes I wonder if he is a crypto-goy. He's besties with Bill Lind, who is essential paleocon tier.

ahh ja, der deutsche humor. wie immer unterhaltsam.

Attached: 1504969888935.jpg (1280x1087, 217K)

Nature experiments with male DNA much more than female. Hence why Chad dad's often have weak, beta sons and visa versa. This is also why there is such a huge variance in personalities, IQs, physical ability etc. Among males while women are quite uniform in comparison.

Tl;Dr nature plays it safe with women but experiments with "expendable" males. This is why women are so boring.

Women being impregnated = more resources needed, chance of death during childbirth, exposure to predators, more of a liability to the tribe
Men impregnating = No drawbags

Given these dynamics, women must be extra picky in order to maximise benefits:costs, so, in practice, they're only attracted to ~5% of the male population.

I think centuries there were no fat women, so any woman was probably good. As long as they had wide hips to push out babies. I think the key thing was that some men naturally oulasred other men, and because of it they just kept on pounding different women until they died, and hence more women gave birth than men.

Thanks for stabbing me into the back, person who doesn't care about capitalizing words.

That’s why Jews don’t pay attention to the man and they follow the women ancestry.

No, because women have to put up with objectifying stares when they go out in a skirt. Clearly they have it much worse.

>to ~5% of the male population
Imagine if they had their way. Level of inbreeding-caused defects would have been catastrophic. Even 1:2 or less ratio provides some of that, just look at arabs and pakis.

If a thousand men finished in that woman's pussy who would be the father?

Women can't even fathom the experience of the "average male", let alone below average. There was a lesbian dyke who went undercover as a man (she passed surprisingly well) and she lasted like 3 weeks and wrote a book about how lonely most men are.

Such a society would be a primitive one, and they tend to kill off the "weird" ones.

Yes, or the incels have to die.

Without high-IQ incels motivtaed by pussy, nothing would get done. We need to keep them around so we can eventually genetically modify the populace.

Reminder that every single one of your male ancestors managed to reproduce.

Attached: br2.jpg (1920x1080, 308K)

>ignoring Founder's Syndrome
wew lad

sounds like the ghetto today

>but it's not fair
Okay, enjoy getting Chad to pay for everything.

>he wants an easy life

Attached: zwei_weltanschauungen.png (461x586, 83K)

>90% of them were Chad.
So why ain't I Chad, too? Oh, because women have been carrying around shit genes. Now we know who's fault it is.

The pussyfication of society.
Men got it rough, no wonder some decide to become trans.

How so?

>Should they be forced to marry and mate with ugly guys who turn them off?

No but ugly guys who turn them off shouldn't be forced to pay welfare for those same women and their half nigger babies.

Attached: 1505780661591.gif (254x196, 1.8M)

You're fucking retarded

>didn't even bother to look it up
WEW LAD

This sounds like something you would use to motivate proles while you sit back and relax

Attached: 6376ABBF-4CF2-4B39-BFD2-854031A73813.jpg (1036x748, 238K)

This.

Wtf does that mean?
1 woman can produce 30 kids.
There is aprox 50/50 women and men so you would only need 1/30 out of that 50%

Keep in mind average life in that era lasted for 40 years max. Not much competition to be had when 10-15 may be able to marry but are poor chad material and 30+ were already suffering from severe accumulated ailments that eventually kill them.

Women aside welfare is the most fucked up thing that sucks our tax money, but if you cut it off it would be like cutting food help to Africa, many people would die, but the world would be a much better place

in a perfect world maybe but women could birth more than one child (twins, triplets, etc) so it could be more or less

because they were bought like property lol, so the successful got more pussy

A little pain now for less pain later.

being a Chad is relative to the rest of society, like IQ

>people still believe this

Which apparently I'm on right now

Being a shit woman is inevitable. If there is a fault with the children 85% of the time it can be traced to the mother.