Sexual selectivity

[ASBO]

This hit me as I was driving past idiots who couldn't figure out left turns. People really aren't so much stupid, as they are distracted -- by themselves. But then it occurred to me, watching some idiot making faces at his cell phone as he talked to (I think) a girl.

Sexual selectivity is for the higher man.

You aren't afraid to make a choice, and you do it, and you stick by it unless there's a surprise -- you're not afraid of fate or death. You're making decisions based on real criteria. That's manly.

Screwing around with other idiots, unsure of direction, unwilling to commit but not smart enough to get out of the game, that's for low-testosterone or low-IQ (or both) types.

[Dave]

I assume you're talking about people choosing mates and not the evolutionary term?

[buckets_of_rain]

A lack of connection to nature causes problems when you try to look for women the same way man did when he was more primitive (that being the carnal way) when you do not also have the instincts that came along with primitive man.  What you get is people wanting to have a lot of sex with anyone who will do it and not exactly knowing why, and probably being able to come up with things that are more enjoyable on all levels, but that don't sooth the urge of the body that evolution has build over millions of years for practical reasons as well.  You end up with confused children who aren't getting any help from their confused parents.  

[Prospero]

From what you are saying and from what I personally think, man is going back to the primitive stage. I believe that the diagram below (found in a philosophy book) works with the behaviour of society. It's normal we're lost sexually, not so long ago, we would think rationally for most sex matters. Now, almost every youngster thinks like an animal.



(everything revolves around will to power and now we are turning back into our caves)

[David_Ravel]

I have yet to see Overman in this diagram.

[Tirithon]

I have yet to see Overman in this diagram.

I would have to agree, it seems to me that we are still on the opposite side of the chart.

[Relapse]

Its really hard to find a mate who can have an intelligent conversation.  Scratch that, Its really hard to find a PERSON who can have an intelligent conversation, and I think most of us know a lot of the ones who can.

Its really just a clash between sex drive and the need to find someone who actually makes you happy.  I think too many people are giving up hope, but sometimes I cant blame them.  The average girl is supposed to mature at around 16, but I don't really see it.  Too many baby's mamas that are living on the streets cause their little Romeo never actually had any interest, and that might be due to the fact that most women I've met think inside a tiny box that is almost all shit they saw on MTV.  I've seen people approaching 30 still doing this.

While I agree that casual sex is a step back for most people, it feels good, and we've been trained to beg for instantaneous pleasure.

[Prospero]

Personally, on the matter of relationships and sexuality, I feel completely left off. I do not usually write about personal matters on this forum, but I admit it, I am somehow frustrated. Almost all possible good-looking girl around me has had many relationships already, has done drugs and other things that I did not experience although I am of the same age. I am considered conservative and "cute" in my behaviour (though what I really am is 'gentleman') by the opposite sex, perhaps physically attractive, but my lack of interest in present-day social forms of entertainment makes me fairly unattractive spiritually. The innocence that used to be in every young girl is now corrupted.

Note that I underlined good-looking. Actually I meant "normal" looking, the average. For sure you can find innoncence in somebody that is ugly and that was not opened to all of society's lustful desires. Perhaps my desires are lustful, the physically attractive and reasonably mentally equilibrated woman is something rare.

[ASBO]

I used to think, all the good women are gone, but really it's like reading the news: monkeys are showing you part of the situation, the worst part, hoping you'll give up and be a soulless self-pitying fuck like them.

There are good girls out there. You need to meet them in other wholesome group activities. I don't know you personally, but respect many of the things you've written here, but think it may be probable that you do a lot of things solo. Nothing wrong with that -- until you want a lady -- at which point try group activities:

* Meetup.com, any discussion group
* Yoga classes
* Book club
* Graduate school
* Jogging group (not aerobics or weight lifting)
* Crafts group (carpentry)
* Habitat for humanity
* Any environmental group
* Animal rescue (many beautiful, intelligent girls)
* Drug smuggling
* Waterboarding
* After work classes
* Home furnishings stores offer how-tos
* Church group ( face facts )
* Political rally for Nader, Kucinich, Paul
* Choral group
* Knitting classes (sounds gay, but if you're a man you won't worry)
* Art classes
* Volunteer at museum
* Volunteer at arboreteum
* Volunteer with law enforcement
* Self-defense seminar

If you're trying to get laid, the above are dead-end losers, because they take way too long for just a shot of jizz. But if you're looking for love, or a partner, they're ace!

[Dunkelheit]

I assume you're talking about people choosing mates and not the evolutionary term?

What's the difference? Sexual Selection in an evolutionary sense refers to specific traits being passed on because of the carriers being selected by mates usually for that trait. A lot of traits start off as mutations and don't become common unless they prove desirable in a survival situation or are seen as attractive. Example: Blonde hair. What the original poster is highlighting is the issue of the common man making poor mating choices thus leading to offspring which reflect these choices.

[Galvanized]

Honestly I have only been involved with two sorts of woman (albeit romantically, and not sexually); either they are intelligent but dependent upon relationships in order to boost their self-esteem, or they are what I call "fawns" which stare at me like a deer in headlights whenever I attempt to initiate a meaningful conversation with them. What has attracted me the most is a woman who is intelligent, physically appealing, and conveys a profound sense of personal strength. I've only met one woman who meets these parameters, so generally I tend to not dwell on the matter of seeking a mate.

[VorteIX]

Let's make this simpler... Sexual selectivity: Love.

Love is to go beyond basic procreatory functions to found a sense of responsibility and emotional entailment of our offspring, and its best coupling in the larger scale of society.

The higher the interest in such tie, the higher the man/woman.

Christians know this, why most metalheads don't?

[beyond_godlike]

I'm not sure that I believe in love.

[ASBO]

Christians know this, why most metalheads don't?

Because metal can't let go of its populist rock half-roots, and that's what has killed it.

AND JUSTICE IT IS

[Dave]

What's the difference? Sexual Selection in an evolutionary sense refers to specific traits being passed on because of the carriers being selected by mates usually for that trait. A lot of traits start off as mutations and don't become common unless they prove desirable in a survival situation or are seen as attractive. Example: Blonde hair. What the original poster is highlighting is the issue of the common man making poor mating choices thus leading to offspring which reflect these choices.

I know what it means, but choosing a mate and sexual selectivity are not the same thing. Choosing mates for humans is based on a variety of factors, while sexual selectivity refers to single traits that serve no other purpose other than attractiveness. Also, sexual selectivity is not "for the higher man", it's instinctive in all animals.