I just want to vent a bit - I started seeing someone a few weeks ago. Old fling that I ran into through some friends that got rekindled, and I was excited that it seemed like more than just casual hookups this time. But there were some yellow flags I ignored that turned out to be red flags, and now I'm feeling frustrated and hurt.
Dude for real dropped the line that men are more "capable" and "logical" on me. That gender studies are "indoctrination." I told him we should probably stop seeing each other if that's really what he thinks. It wouldn't be logical for me to keep seeing someone that thinks lesser of me, now, would it?
I'm grateful to have some guy friends that I turned to after I left, cuz I wanted to go into "fuck all men" mode, but I know it's not true or helpful. Just like there are women out there that have internalized misogyny, there's feminist men, enbies, etc. We're all just people and we're not monoliths beholden to differences in biology. This is just sexist, manosphere bullshit in particular
Anyway. I'm still feeling angry and wanted to put it out there for some support and solidarity. Anyone have a recent win they'd like to share or something?
ETA: Thank you so much for the conversation y'all! I've been trying to keep up but I gotta get some sleep. I'll check in later but hope everyone has a good day. Keep up the empowerment! 💜
I'm not going to speak about humans because that's too contentious. But anthropology has lots of study of primate partner selection and genetic outcomes. Were they measure based on reproductive success. If you look at the genetic data, you'll see that there is a bimodal approach to sexual selection in primates.
The old trope is: males maximize the reproductive success by having a diverse set of partners, and investing in only a few. Females maximize the reproductive success by having relatively few partners and maximizing investment in a few offspring. But in both scenarios diversifying the genetic material gives you a higher probability of a successful outcome. Interestingly in primates teste size is directly related to the promiscuity of the species. So bonobos have very large testes, and orangutan's relatively small testes. Because they have less sperm competition.
If this kind of research interest you, I highly recommend taking a look at an anthropology primate sexual selection course, or at least the reading for one.
So where people get into a lot of contentious trouble is humans have opinions, and the research done on primates does not necessarily correlate with the behavior of humans, and it's easy to take some research and make broad sweeping generalizations about behavior and etc.
So this is where applying the bimodal sexual incentives, the manosphere latched on and said, it maximizes the reproductive success of a female to find a stable social partner, but to get diverse hybridized genes from short-term sexual partners. i.e. the abd boy attraction is due to this bimodal sexual preference. I have no idea if this actually applies to humans, it's an interesting theory, but no research ethics board is ever going to allow for a study on this.
Interestingly there were species of birds that were thought to be monogamous, but with the advent of cheap genetic testing, proved that the bird species followed this bimodal sexual model even though they had a nominal social partner. Super interesting data